3 ms·
It's like the cookie dilemma. Get rid of them and fingerprinting will become the norm (and user's lose the ability to reset them). I don't know how much fingerp
by throwaway3699 6y ago
It's like the cookie dilemma. Get rid of them and fingerprinting will become the norm (and user's lose the ability to reset them). I don't know how much fingerprinting you can be done within a JVM, but I imagine it's a lot.
- anticristi 6y agoJust as no amount of technical implementation will save the environment, I now believe that no amount of technical implementation (by itself) will enable privacy. GDPR is clear: Any data that allows an individual to be directly or indirectly identified is personal data. Fines are now targeting "lower hanging fruits", i.e., more obvious violations. However, as the landscape shifts, I'm looking forward to the first fine related to non-consented fingerprinting.
- kllrnohj 6y agoBut right now they aren't targeting improper usage of identifying data, but instead that identifying data exists at all. This doesn't seem like a GDPR violation at all?
- anticristi 6y agoCollection of identifying data also needs consent. It would be perfectly legal to have an AAID and never disclose it to anyone, but that wouldn't be very useful. :)
- kllrnohj 6y agoRight, but they aren't complaining about collection of identifying data. Google/Android (or iOS) isn't collecting the AAID themselves in an unauthorized way. The complaint is purely that the AAID is generated, fully independent of whether or not it's ever used.
- anticristi 6y agoGenerating UUID and persisting them on a device is perfectly fine. However, once you send this UUID to a server (i.e., the owner of the server collects it) without consent, that becomes illegal.