6 ms·

I just tested. Like cookies, it also obeys domain-only visibility. So, all hopes for cross-domain user tracking are still doomed. sigh

orangecat 16y ago
So, all hopes for cross-domain user tracking are still doomed. sigh I would certainly hope so...
dandelany 16y ago
I'm completely unconvinced that cross-domain local storage is even remotely a good idea. I can't think of any data I'd want to store in a clientside database that I would want other sites to be able to see/modify. So, all hopes for cross-domain user tracking are still doomed. sigh Um, this is a good thing. I don't want the sites I visit to be communicating my use patterns to each other.
- paraschopra 16y ago
  Actually, it wasn't a sarcasm. I do need cross-domain user tracking for perfectly legitmate reasons. Many of my users do A/B test where control is www.example.com and variation is www.example.org (for example) and the goal page lies on www.shoppingcart.com -- currently there is NO way I can track a user across these three domains (no, third party cookies don't work properly on Safari and Opera). I am left to experiment with user fingerprinting md5(user-agent, http accept and screen resolution) but that is less than ideal situation.
  - jdunck 16y ago
    If you don't need 100% reach, have a look at xauth source: http://github.com/xauth/xauth http://github.com/xauth/xauth They use a central domain and window.postMessage to make a secure but shared storage.
cheald 16y ago
Why on earth would you imply that cross-domain user tracking is a good thing?
- calcnerd256 16y ago
  because it's a choice Edit: I misread "is" as "could be". It's a good thing to have because it could be a good thing to use. It may be a bad thing to have enabled by default, but it's a bad thing to omit outright.
  - cheald 16y ago
    The potential for abuse is staggering. Yes, it would be good to have to benign purposes, but unless you trust everyone on the internet to act honorably, it's a terrible idea.
    - calcnerd256 16y ago
      Then disable it by default, but don't leave it out altogether.
      - cheald 16y ago
        Can you give me an example of when it would ever be appropriate to turn something like that on?
        calcnerd256 16y ago
        whenever the user wants it
Groxx 16y ago
(to repliers) </sarcasm>
- lanstein 16y ago
  This was one of the less obvious uses of sarcasm in recent memory.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    It's entirely possible I'm wrong, but I'm hinging my decision largely on the location (hn, where invasive user tracking is synonymous with evil with nearly everyone) and the "sigh".
- dandelany 16y ago
  I don't think so... If it was sarcastic, it wouldn't really be worth mentioning, like saying <sarcasm>Oh great. Another car with airbags!</sarcasm>
  - Groxx 16y ago
    Good point, people never post useless comments. </sarcasm>

orangecat 16y ago

So, all hopes for cross-domain user tracking are still doomed. sigh I would certainly hope so...

dandelany 16y ago

I'm completely unconvinced that cross-domain local storage is even remotely a good idea. I can't think of any data I'd want to store in a clientside database that I would want other sites to be able to see/modify. So, all hopes for cross-domain user tracking are still doomed. sigh Um, this is a good thing. I don't want the sites I visit to be communicating my use patterns to each other.

paraschopra 16y ago
Actually, it wasn't a sarcasm. I do need cross-domain user tracking for perfectly legitmate reasons. Many of my users do A/B test where control is www.example.com and variation is www.example.org (for example) and the goal page lies on www.shoppingcart.com -- currently there is NO way I can track a user across these three domains (no, third party cookies don't work properly on Safari and Opera). I am left to experiment with user fingerprinting md5(user-agent, http accept and screen resolution) but that is less than ideal situation.
- jdunck 16y ago
  If you don't need 100% reach, have a look at xauth source: http://github.com/xauth/xauth http://github.com/xauth/xauth They use a central domain and window.postMessage to make a secure but shared storage.

cheald 16y ago

Why on earth would you imply that cross-domain user tracking is a good thing?

calcnerd256 16y ago
because it's a choice Edit: I misread "is" as "could be". It's a good thing to have because it could be a good thing to use. It may be a bad thing to have enabled by default, but it's a bad thing to omit outright.
- cheald 16y ago
  The potential for abuse is staggering. Yes, it would be good to have to benign purposes, but unless you trust everyone on the internet to act honorably, it's a terrible idea.
  - calcnerd256 16y ago
    Then disable it by default, but don't leave it out altogether.
    - cheald 16y ago
      Can you give me an example of when it would ever be appropriate to turn something like that on?
      - calcnerd256 16y ago
        whenever the user wants it

Groxx 16y ago

(to repliers) </sarcasm>

lanstein 16y ago
This was one of the less obvious uses of sarcasm in recent memory.
- Groxx 16y ago
  It's entirely possible I'm wrong, but I'm hinging my decision largely on the location (hn, where invasive user tracking is synonymous with evil with nearly everyone) and the "sigh".
dandelany 16y ago
I don't think so... If it was sarcastic, it wouldn't really be worth mentioning, like saying <sarcasm>Oh great. Another car with airbags!</sarcasm>
- Groxx 16y ago
  Good point, people never post useless comments. </sarcasm>