4 ms·
Oh absolutely! I just like to bring up P3P whenever someone inevitably says there should be a standard for 'cookie popups'. AFAIK, P3P actually goes further tha
by chriswarbo 5y ago
Oh absolutely! I just like to bring up P3P whenever someone inevitably says there should be a standard for 'cookie popups'. AFAIK, P3P actually goes further than all/nothing: it distinguishes between 1st-party/3rd-party, required/optional, which details are involved (IP, email address, etc.), data retention periods, etc. Plus, this was all implemented, in the most popular browser (at the time), a full two decades ago!
The context has obviously changed: there used to be no consequences for lying/bypassing (I didn't actually know about the Google case you mention; although it doesn't surprise me!), and most importantly: there were no consequences for not bothering to put it on a site at all. Hence the low adoption, and hence it died away. That's now changed, there's a chance some "non evil" sites might bring it back.
> Current deliberately-awful cookie consent prompts are malicious compliance aimed to make law makers look incompetent and make people resent privacy protection laws.
Yep. That's why machine-readable requests, with default-deny responses from user agents, won't appear any time soon; especially in browsers made/sponsored by adtech giants! The inconvenient, manual-effort is a feature of consent popups (at least, for those who came up with the idea; most sites just jumped on the band-wagon)