4 ms·
I'm intrigued by what you wrote about CNAME records. Could you elaborate on that briefly?
by waltherg 6y ago
I'm intrigued by what you wrote about CNAME records. Could you elaborate on that briefly?
- iamacyborg 6y agoMasking third party tracking through CNAME. ad blockers are already blocking this deceptive shit. https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/28/brave_cname_block/ https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/28/brave_cname_block/
- marvinblum 6y agoUh that's interesting, I didn't new that. Thanks :)
- iamacyborg 6y agoYup, I don't mean to disparage your product but masking third party cookies is not great from a transparency perspective.
- marvinblum 6y agoI cannot answer your other comment, but Pirsch won't use cookies. That the CNAME trick doesn't work anymore is not too much of an issue.
- marvinblum 6y agoDepending on the script (if it's configurable), you can send the request made to your own server instead of some analytics solution and redirect that request using a CNAME record. Combined with the script being served from you own domain, blockers will think it's a regular request and won't block it. They usually use a blacklist to filter unwanted traffic (like to GA). As we are still working on Pirsch, we don't have a documentation to explain the setup in more detail yet, but you should be able to find instructions somewhere. [Edit] Okay, so it seems like blockers will catch that, see iamacyborgs comment. But we will provide a nice and simple backend integration which basically will do the same as the script, but is unblockable. [Edit #2] Looks like it will only block cookies using this technique, so it should work as described.