"Implicitly allow it with terms and conditions" The ICO report says that is fine, provided that it is (i) sufficiently informative and (ii) you provide an upda

"Implicitly allow it with terms and conditions" The ICO report says that is fine, provided that it is (i) sufficiently informative and (ii) you provide an update to existing users about the change in terms. I'm wondering about the following: what if I wrote a bit of Javascript serving up a picture of a pile of cookies during normal use, which can be clicked on to to call up a pop-up window describing how my site makes use of customer-tracking software with a dialog allowing the user to switch to untracked mode. Untracked mode could be implemented by issuing -you guessed it- a cookie, but one which is only used to check that the user opts out, and so is "strictly necessary" for this approach. It's sailing close to the wind: there's no positive act of consent; but by making it easy to see the state of privacy and change it, it is arguably more privacy-friendly than a T&C. I'm tempted to try it on my site and get feedback. The ICO report also talks about use of browser settings to govern privacy.