7 ms·

Slight tangent, but it seems that TechCrunch are also quite bad at privacy - following the link initially redirects to https://guce.techcrunch.com/consent?brand

by ipsi 7y ago

Slight tangent, but it seems that TechCrunch are also quite bad at privacy - following the link initially redirects to https://guce.techcrunch.com/consent?brandType=nonEU&done=https%3A%2F%2Ftechcrunch%2Ecom%2F2020%2F02%2F13%2Ffacebook%2Ddating%2Dlaunch%2Dblocked%2Din%2Deurope%2Dafter%2Dit%2Dfails%2Dto%2Dshow%2Dprivacy%2Dworkings%2F&gcrumb={{CRUMB} https://guce.techcrunch.com/consent?brandType=nonEU&done=htt...} with a 307, which, when followed redirects to https://guce.advertising.com/collectIdentifiers?sessionId=3_cc-session_{{GUID} https://guce.advertising.com/collectIdentifiers?sessionId=3_...} with a 302. I like that the "consent" URL doesn't actually ask for consent - it just immediately redirects to "collect identifiers" - it's possible they already assume they have my consent, but since this was checked with a cookie-less cURL command, that seems unlikely. Since my adblocker is blocking the guce.advertising.com domain, I guess I don't get to visit TechCrunch.

HenryBemis 7y ago
I got 18 hits on PrivacyBadger, 12 his on NoScript, 19 hits on AdBlockPlus. I configure all 3 manually, and every now and then I check them to see if there is anything new in the ad/tracking domain, and block it immediately. I don't know what my HOSTS file is blocking, but I assume it also cuts off some of the ads/trackers.
- akuji1993 7y ago
  Just fyi Adblock Plus has an Acceptable Ads program [1], so you will still get ads, only the ad providers paid Adblock to get through. If you actually want all ads blocked, I'd suggest Raymond Hill's uBlock Origin [2]. [1] https://help.getadblock.com/support/solutions/articles/6000092027-about-the-acceptable-ads-program-and-non-intrusive-ads https://help.getadblock.com/support/solutions/articles/60000... [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
  - nottorp 7y ago
    Just for the record, uBlock Origin already seems to block 2 items when opening just the consent form. Since I never got farther than that on <whatever yahoo calls their privacy non-consent tech this week>, I don't know how much it blocks later.
girst 7y ago
> Since my adblocker is blocking the guce.advertising.com domain, I guess I don't get to visit TechCrunch. Same here. I usually 'proxy' through the Internet Archive in these situations: https://web.archive.org/web/20200213123006/https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/13/facebook-dating-launch-blocked-in-europe-after-it-fails-to-show-privacy-workings/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200213123006/https://techcrunc...
StavrosK 7y ago
Are you outside the EU? It probably decided they don't need your consent, as I did get a consent page. It was convoluted, impossible to decline (I'm still looking around) and illegal under the GDPR, but I did get it. EDIT: Yeah, it doesn't seem possible to withdraw consent. I stopped after ten clicks that only led to "informational" pages where sentences stopped mid-way.
- reeeeee 7y ago
  Is there a form somewhere that can be used to report websites that do not comply with GDPR?
  - rzwitserloot 7y ago
    GDPR is a regulation enforced on a per country basis. The EU wrote it and the EU guarantees / enforces that all member states enforce it. Therefore, talk to your local DPA. For example, in The Netherlands, you'd talk to the "Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens" (translated: Personal data protection agency"). All EU countries have some sort of governmental institution, usually named something along the lines of 'data protection agency'. As per the article, the one in Ireland is called "Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC)" – and they took the lead on blocking FB Dating.
    - lentil 7y ago
      If you're in the UK you can report it to the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office): https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/ https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/. They have a form specifically for reporting concerns with websites' use of cookies, see https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/cookies/ https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/cookies/.
- ipsi 7y ago
  I'm in Germany, so definitely inside the EU. Though I'm using a non-European DNS (NextDNS) so maybe that has something to do with it?
  - 7y ago
niklasd 7y ago
I always find it baffling that news pages are amongst the worst offenders regardings tracking (at least that how it feels). Here in Germany we have news pages like Spiegel Online, whose journalists criticise Facebook et al. in quite harsh words, but you can't read any of these articles without loading a bazillion tracking cookies on your browser. This probably stems from the seperation of webpage tech, advertising and newsroom, but it strongly feels for me that these newspapers are not living by the values they preach.
- nothrabannosir 7y ago
  > it strongly feels for me that these newspapers are not living by the values they preach. This isn’t as big a problem as people make it out to be. Their role is to report. If they are corrupt but still report on corruption, then they haven’t failed as journalists, merely as an organisation. If they violate privacy, but still report on it, same deal. We can denounce them while still appreciating their actual reporting. Problems arise when their nefarious behaviour affects the actual reporting. But, ironically, the more hypocritical they are (i.e. the more they report on the thing they do wrong) the less likely that is. I’d say with every damnation of a news organisation for their privacy violations, we should in parallel celebrate their dedication to report on that which they are guilty of. The alternative of total silence would be worse.
  - akuji1993 7y ago
    > If they are corrupt but still report on corruption, then they haven’t failed as journalists. In this specific case, yes, I think they have failed. It's different when you're a non-vegan writing about veganism and critizise non-vegans. It's not okay to be corrupt and condemn corruption in your article. I can't take your opinion seriously if you don't live at all by the values you seem to protect or preach for in your writing...
    - oliverx0 7y ago
      This is called a tu quoque fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque “ Tu quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwi, tuːˈkwoʊkweɪ/;[1] Latin for "you also"), or the appeal to hypocrisy, is an informal fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s).”
tomger 7y ago
Another post where the top part of the thread is a tangent/unrelated to the post. This is becoming common on HN and I don’t find it helpful.
- corentin88 7y ago
  Totally agree. It’s especially annoying because it’s the top thread.
  - Slashbot 7y ago
    who cares.. they are at least slagging off a well known shit website for doing shitbaggery things.
  - Narishma 7y ago
    It's the top thread because people find it interesting. If you don't, just click the [-] and it will close the whole thread.
- 0-_-0 7y ago
  This problem is already solved by 2 mechanisms: 1. HN's upvote/downvote system. This allows posts that the audience finds more interesting to move to the top. If you don't want to see something, downvote it. If it's on the top that means other people want to see it. 2. The little [-] icon allow you to close an subtree of conversations with a single click.
- Waterluvian 7y ago
  I absolutely want to hear about these things but maybe in a little tangents section. Though that means more UI complexity. Hiding the thread works well too.
- ropeladder 7y ago
  It's gotten to the point where I assume that the top comment on every story about privacy by a news outlet will be about their hypocrisy. It's pretty disappointing. (Almost like tech workers feel defensive and want to change the subject, or that maybe these upvotes aren't in good faith? If the HN audience actually got organized around this kind of thing certain organizations stand to lose quite a bit.)
mnw21cam 7y ago
Even if your system doesn't block guce.advertising.com, when you visit this site, you get an obnoxious page saying that you now have a choice whether to grant consent to tracking or "manage options", and then if you select "manage options" it says that there is no option - you must consent in order to view the web site. This is illegal. Simple as. Flag the post and move on. Complain to the Information Commissioner if you feel like it.
- spunker540 7y ago
  Why is it illegal? If I understand gdpr correctly tracking is okay if it’s necessary for business purposes. If a publisher’s business model is ad-supported then it seems necessary.
  - probably_wrong 7y ago
    > If a publisher’s business model is ad-supported then it seems necessary. If that were true, everyone would simply claim "tracking is essential for my business" and the law would be toothless. If they want to show ads for Ford in the car section of the newspaper, that's fine. If they want to show targeted ads provided that I agree with it, that's also fine. But showing targeted ads with no way to opt-out is not allowed.

by ipsi 7y ago

HenryBemis 7y ago

I got 18 hits on PrivacyBadger, 12 his on NoScript, 19 hits on AdBlockPlus. I configure all 3 manually, and every now and then I check them to see if there is anything new in the ad/tracking domain, and block it immediately. I don't know what my HOSTS file is blocking, but I assume it also cuts off some of the ads/trackers.

akuji1993 7y ago
Just fyi Adblock Plus has an Acceptable Ads program [1], so you will still get ads, only the ad providers paid Adblock to get through. If you actually want all ads blocked, I'd suggest Raymond Hill's uBlock Origin [2]. [1] https://help.getadblock.com/support/solutions/articles/6000092027-about-the-acceptable-ads-program-and-non-intrusive-ads https://help.getadblock.com/support/solutions/articles/60000... [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
- nottorp 7y ago
  Just for the record, uBlock Origin already seems to block 2 items when opening just the consent form. Since I never got farther than that on <whatever yahoo calls their privacy non-consent tech this week>, I don't know how much it blocks later.

girst 7y ago

> Since my adblocker is blocking the guce.advertising.com domain, I guess I don't get to visit TechCrunch. Same here. I usually 'proxy' through the Internet Archive in these situations: https://web.archive.org/web/20200213123006/https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/13/facebook-dating-launch-blocked-in-europe-after-it-fails-to-show-privacy-workings/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200213123006/https://techcrunc...

StavrosK 7y ago

Are you outside the EU? It probably decided they don't need your consent, as I did get a consent page. It was convoluted, impossible to decline (I'm still looking around) and illegal under the GDPR, but I did get it. EDIT: Yeah, it doesn't seem possible to withdraw consent. I stopped after ten clicks that only led to "informational" pages where sentences stopped mid-way.

reeeeee 7y ago
Is there a form somewhere that can be used to report websites that do not comply with GDPR?
- rzwitserloot 7y ago
  GDPR is a regulation enforced on a per country basis. The EU wrote it and the EU guarantees / enforces that all member states enforce it. Therefore, talk to your local DPA. For example, in The Netherlands, you'd talk to the "Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens" (translated: Personal data protection agency"). All EU countries have some sort of governmental institution, usually named something along the lines of 'data protection agency'. As per the article, the one in Ireland is called "Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC)" – and they took the lead on blocking FB Dating.
  - lentil 7y ago
    If you're in the UK you can report it to the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office): https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/ https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/. They have a form specifically for reporting concerns with websites' use of cookies, see https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/cookies/ https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/cookies/.
ipsi 7y ago
I'm in Germany, so definitely inside the EU. Though I'm using a non-European DNS (NextDNS) so maybe that has something to do with it?
- 7y ago

niklasd 7y ago

I always find it baffling that news pages are amongst the worst offenders regardings tracking (at least that how it feels). Here in Germany we have news pages like Spiegel Online, whose journalists criticise Facebook et al. in quite harsh words, but you can't read any of these articles without loading a bazillion tracking cookies on your browser. This probably stems from the seperation of webpage tech, advertising and newsroom, but it strongly feels for me that these newspapers are not living by the values they preach.

nothrabannosir 7y ago
> it strongly feels for me that these newspapers are not living by the values they preach. This isn’t as big a problem as people make it out to be. Their role is to report. If they are corrupt but still report on corruption, then they haven’t failed as journalists, merely as an organisation. If they violate privacy, but still report on it, same deal. We can denounce them while still appreciating their actual reporting. Problems arise when their nefarious behaviour affects the actual reporting. But, ironically, the more hypocritical they are (i.e. the more they report on the thing they do wrong) the less likely that is. I’d say with every damnation of a news organisation for their privacy violations, we should in parallel celebrate their dedication to report on that which they are guilty of. The alternative of total silence would be worse.
- akuji1993 7y ago
  > If they are corrupt but still report on corruption, then they haven’t failed as journalists. In this specific case, yes, I think they have failed. It's different when you're a non-vegan writing about veganism and critizise non-vegans. It's not okay to be corrupt and condemn corruption in your article. I can't take your opinion seriously if you don't live at all by the values you seem to protect or preach for in your writing...
  - oliverx0 7y ago
    This is called a tu quoque fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque “ Tu quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwi, tuːˈkwoʊkweɪ/;[1] Latin for "you also"), or the appeal to hypocrisy, is an informal fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s).”

tomger 7y ago

Another post where the top part of the thread is a tangent/unrelated to the post. This is becoming common on HN and I don’t find it helpful.

corentin88 7y ago
Totally agree. It’s especially annoying because it’s the top thread.
- Slashbot 7y ago
  who cares.. they are at least slagging off a well known shit website for doing shitbaggery things.
- Narishma 7y ago
  It's the top thread because people find it interesting. If you don't, just click the [-] and it will close the whole thread.
0-_-0 7y ago
This problem is already solved by 2 mechanisms: 1. HN's upvote/downvote system. This allows posts that the audience finds more interesting to move to the top. If you don't want to see something, downvote it. If it's on the top that means other people want to see it. 2. The little [-] icon allow you to close an subtree of conversations with a single click.
Waterluvian 7y ago
I absolutely want to hear about these things but maybe in a little tangents section. Though that means more UI complexity. Hiding the thread works well too.
ropeladder 7y ago
It's gotten to the point where I assume that the top comment on every story about privacy by a news outlet will be about their hypocrisy. It's pretty disappointing. (Almost like tech workers feel defensive and want to change the subject, or that maybe these upvotes aren't in good faith? If the HN audience actually got organized around this kind of thing certain organizations stand to lose quite a bit.)

mnw21cam 7y ago

Even if your system doesn't block guce.advertising.com, when you visit this site, you get an obnoxious page saying that you now have a choice whether to grant consent to tracking or "manage options", and then if you select "manage options" it says that there is no option - you must consent in order to view the web site. This is illegal. Simple as. Flag the post and move on. Complain to the Information Commissioner if you feel like it.

spunker540 7y ago
Why is it illegal? If I understand gdpr correctly tracking is okay if it’s necessary for business purposes. If a publisher’s business model is ad-supported then it seems necessary.
- probably_wrong 7y ago
  > If a publisher’s business model is ad-supported then it seems necessary. If that were true, everyone would simply claim "tracking is essential for my business" and the law would be toothless. If they want to show ads for Ford in the car section of the newspaper, that's fine. If they want to show targeted ads provided that I agree with it, that's also fine. But showing targeted ads with no way to opt-out is not allowed.