4 ms·

On related news: Just two days ago the EU ePrivacy regulation took the first hurdle in Brussels. This will most likely bring some changes to the whole consent d

On related news: Just two days ago the EU ePrivacy regulation took the first hurdle in Brussels. This will most likely bring some changes to the whole consent drama. I'm not good at reading legalese and there seem to be no commentary for the current version[1] yet. What I understand is that they "encourage" browsers to implement "whitelists" (their choice of word, not mine) as a solution to "end-users [..] overloaded with requests to provide consent". I'm not sure what is in there regarding first-party analytics cookies which some hoped will be exempted. [1] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6087-2021-INIT/en/pdf https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6087-2021-I... Partly recycled comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26103635 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26103635

lmkg 6y ago
I would hone in on pages 27 & 28 in that document. In particular, this quote: > Cookies can also be a legitimate and useful tool, for example, in assessing the effectiveness of a delivered information society service, for example of website design and advertising or by helping to measure the numbers of end-users visiting a website, certain pages of a website or the number of end-users of an application. This is not the case, however, regarding cookies and similar identifiers used to determine the nature of who is using the site, which always require the consent of the end-user. It is, of course, legalese. But they seem to be drawing a distinction between analytics and tracking. Counting distinct users seems to be acceptable without consent; profiling users does not.