3 ms·

Your landing page says "no cookies or consent banners" and "compliant with all privacy laws", but the timestamp approach stores data on a user's computer in a w

by jefftk 4y ago

Your landing page says "no cookies or consent banners" and "compliant with all privacy laws", but the timestamp approach stores data on a user's computer in a way that is not "strictly necessary in order to provide an information society service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user". Could you explain how you see your approach as compliant with the ePrivacy directive? Full text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32002L0058&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... Guidance: https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2012/wp194_en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinio...

IshKebab 4y ago
Yeah this is just a cookie by another name. Probably already used by supercookies. The GDPR doesn't single out cookies so you can't get around it by using a different storage device.
- jefftk 4y ago
  > The GDPR doesn't single out cookies so you can't get around it by using a different storage device. Quibble: this isn't a GDPR issue, it's an ePrivacy issue. Two different regulations.
eloff 4y ago
So the moral of the story is to use passive fingerprinting that is able to identify and track individual users, because then you can skip the cookie banner and be compliant with the law? I think I would rather use this and rely on the courts to interpret it fairly if it ever came to that, which it won't.