3 ms·
Cookie consent should be the responsibility of user-agent cookie policy. And virtually all of the consent banners I've seen are about cookies. And I certainly
by recursive 5y ago
Cookie consent should be the responsibility of user-agent cookie policy. And virtually all of the consent banners I've seen are about cookies. And I certainly think it has a better shot of being comprehensible by users in general than having a separate UI for consent for every site. Especially when it's in those sites' interest to confuse or annoy users into allowing the cookies.
- ketzu 5y agoIn this thread I had the impression that the discussion widened to more than just cookie-banners, more general privacy on the web. One of the problems I have with the pure-local approach is that I want certain cookies (or certain cookie functionality) of sites but not others. Some functionality I want and some I don't want can be implemented with the same cookie. I think I would need tagged cookies (so I can disallow those that are used for things I don't want) as well as an assurance to not use the other cookies in the "wrong" ways. That's why I think purely local cookie management is severly lacking and not suitable to tackle the problem in a user-friendly and nuanced manner - beyond an all-or-nothing approach. I personally do not think a browser level approach can enforce the privacy goals without cooperation of (and therefore enforcement against the companies providing) the serverside implementation. That, of course, does not mean that a browser level setting that has to be honored by the server side and can be transfered between sites would not be preferable to clicklists and banners.