3 ms·
> The services (here: web fonts) could be supplied another way, so exposing the user's IP to google is not strictly necessary, from a technical POV. Because an
by miohtama 5y ago
> The services (here: web fonts) could be supplied another way, so exposing the user's IP to google is not strictly necessary, from a technical POV.
Because an IP address needed to receive a download. This kind of decision means that any hot linking of static media assets is now in hot waters.
A sensible judge would say IP address is not PII but a prerequisite to use Internet in the first place. Like a license plate on car e.g. other broken analogue of tracking. Like a power socket. However the definition of PII in Europe is overly capturing (saying this as an European.)
- valzam 5y agoThe problem of course is that IP addresses can totally be used by Google to build up a profile of your browsing behaviour across the whole web. Even if typical end User ip4 addresses change quite a lot due to ISP NATs I imagine it's still very valuable information. Obv with ipV6 and static IPs for everyone it becomes a privacy nightmare
- vanviegen 5y agoI agree that license plates make an apt comparison. How would you feel if private companies set up plate readers at just about every parking area everywhere? Like with IPs, they wouldn't be able to identify unique individuals with 100% certainty (as both IPs and cars may be shared), but they'd get pretty close. Certainly when it can be combined with other data. So yeah, to me it makes sense that IPs are personal data.