8 ms·
Private Click Measurement is a standard that Apple has proposed and is working with the W3C to standardize, as well as working with other browser manufacturers:
by X-Istence 3y ago
Private Click Measurement is a standard that Apple has proposed and is working with the W3C to standardize, as well as working with other browser manufacturers:
https://webkit.org/blog/11529/introducing-private-click-measurement-pcm/ https://webkit.org/blog/11529/introducing-private-click-meas...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nicolaslem 3y agoAh yes, the AMP strategy.
- kergonath 3y agoExactly what people say they should have done with FaceTime, right? So, which one is it? Should they do it or should they not?
- candiodari 3y agoIf they were really working with standardization, they'd wait ...
- Someone 3y agoAre there any examples of using that approach in the history of web browsers? I thought that mostly boiled down to “IE/Netscape/Chrome/…” implements it, and if enough browsers implement it, we’ll document it as standard”
- jedberg 3y agoNo they wouldn't. I can't think of a single thing in any browser that was implemented after a standard was created. It's always been driven by one browser just doing a thing, then other browsers do it slightly differently, then the standards body comes together and they settle on the-one-true-way and everyone updates their support to match the standard.
- mnw21cam 3y ago[flagged]
- jedberg 3y agoLol ok let me say "most everyone mostly matches the standard" :)
- reaperducer 3y agoOh, the boundless optimism. How cute. Oh, pointless condescension on the internet. How cute.
- mvonballmo 3y agoIt very much used to work like this, pretty much exclusively. More recently, though (especially, the last couple of years), browser vendors work very closely with standards groups, contributing there, and looking for feedback from other browser vendors. At least in the CSS and JS space, the extensions to those standards have proceeded largely as a group effort rather than as you described.
- dwaite 3y agoThere's pretty much always implementations, but it is a huge headache when people rely on behavior which is not yet stable. The browsers have started to first ship things behind feature flags, and in Chrome's case also behind "Origin trials". We just have less need now for one browser to go off and define their own way for borders to be drawn as rounded rectangles. I suspect we'll see some funky CSS extensions ship pre-standardization for VR headsets, though. Things like controlling the z-axis height of <dialog> and other elements.
- tantalic 3y agoBecoming a standard requires independent, working implementations. So this is very much part of the process. https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-experience https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-exp....
- candiodari 3y agoIt doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. This is somewhere between anti-consumer and stealing.
- dwaite 3y ago> It doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. I can't quite figure out who or what in particular you are talking about. If the original topic, Apple/Safari do not charge for private click measurement, and Apple does not have any significant advertising platform for the web. There are other more controversial uses of the technique - mobile game SDKs used tracking identifiers and other techniques to try to measure conversion and associate it to a persona, which Apple shut down with ATT. Apple added a PCM-like technology at about the same time so that advertisers could get broad metrics on advertising programs and conversion. This is different/separate from more controversial uses, such as blocking in-app advertising/install conversion metrics and persona building. There, Apple _does_ have some competing interest in terms of the App Store ad platform.
- ArchOversight 3y agoWait until Google implements something and shoves it down everyones throat in Chrome and then has all the Google fanboys claiming that its the best thing since sliced bread and thus should get implemented by every other browser just because Google did it? That's how we ended up in the situation where Google shipped U2F, sites implemented their implementation and then when the standard WebAuthN was built it was not compatible so sites had to be updated to be standards compliant, and it took a while to do so. Or when Google added WebP without clear consensus. Or when they added FLoC or Topics API, or whatever else they have cooked up. Or things like WebUSB, WebMIDI and others? There's a glut of Chrome only sites out there, and it continues to grow as web developers test just on Chrome but not the other browser engines. It's turning into the next IE 6, I remember the time there were a lot of "Made for IE 6" logos and graphics on sites and they did not render well or at all in Netscape.
- Taywee 3y ago"dearth" means "lack" or "scarcity". I think it's the opposite of what you meant.
- ArchOversight 3y agoYou are correct. Edited and replaced the word with glut. Thank you!
- bee_rider 3y agoAs much as the locking down of iOS is annoying for everybody technical, we should be somewhat thankful that Apple has ensured a large population of mobile safari users.
- MBCook 3y agoExcept in every thread about iOS or Safari are a ton of people crying for real Chrome on iOS because Safari is the new IE 6 holding the web back by not implementing the new WebDogCam4 “standard” Google pushed out 2 days ago.
- wunderland 3y agoI don't understand what's preventing me from manually removing these URL parameters as well, just like I currently do with UTM params when I copy/paste something into a chat app.
- anamexis 3y agoNothing.
- capableweb 3y agoIt's about clicks instead of sharing it. So it'll strip it when you click it, instead of copying the link, pasting it, then stripping and hitting enter. Workflow optimization basically :) Also, more privacy by default seems like a good thing, not everyone understands URLs.
- samstave 3y agoI would like this capability on any home router/cable-modem/FW
- bee_rider 3y agoThat would be neat. I suspect the browser and/or OS would have to be aware of it though, in order to cooperate, in which case why not just have the browser/OS implement it?
- cyral 3y agoWith HTTPS it cannot read the URL query params
- edgineer 3y agoNot saying it's practical but you could add your own CA on each client device and the router MitMs. Or, e.g. you can set a flag when building Firefox that will store the secrets necessary to decrypt those packets, and the client sends the secrets to the router which sniffs and decrypts on the fly.
- rektide 3y agoIt'll be interesting to see how this goes. Google and Mozilla+Meta each have competing standards. https://github.com/WICG/turtledove https://github.com/WICG/turtledove https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/privacy-preserving-attribution-for-advertising/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/privacy-preserving-attri... To my knowledge, Mozilla's design is the only one where someone other than the browser collects & reports on click activity, and with a fairly trustless anonymizing double blind strategy for those intermediaries.
- WeylandYutani 3y agoMozilla isn't in the advertising business. Hell not being a trillion dollar company earns them my sympathy.
- donw 3y agoMozilla is in whatever business Google pays them to be in.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 3y agoWithout the online advertising business Mozilla cannot survive. As such, they advocate for preserving the online ads business. They partner with an advertising company. And they derive profit in return. Opinions may differ, but to me being an advocate for it is no better than being "in" the advertising business. (Not to suggest Mozilla is worthless. Far from it. I use Firefox on mobile, although I use a browser sparingly.)
- bmikaili 3y ago[flagged]
- ilyt 3y ago"Let's fight tracking by embedding tracking in the core of the browser" yeah, great idea. But I'm sure W3C will bend over as usual
- Benjamin_Dobell 3y agoFrom the link: > Websites should not be able to attribute data of an ad click and a conversion to a single user as part of large scale tracking I'm curious, do people generally care about this specifically, or is it the sharing of this information with third parties that's the problem? I run Firefox with in-built privacy protection enabled and uBlock Origin. However, I'm not doing so because I want to stop the websites I frequent knowing which email of theirs I clicked. My concern is when they share my data with other parties whose services I'm not explicitly engaging with.
- brianpan 3y agoAttributing data to a single user is what allows 3rd parties to amass a detailed profile of you (by looking at all your data from many websites that all share with the same 3rd party). I doubt people are educated enough to care about this specifically, but the tech industry should care.
- fennecfoxy 3y agoOf course they can only do this because of their cult-like ecosystem and hugely inflated prices for hardware, software and services. Without those sources of revenue, well, Apple would turn to data and whatnot too. Was only a while ago that Apple first switched on to the "private and secure" as a selling point, because much of their competition relies on it. I think we can maybe expect other large tech companies to follow suit, not make money from data/advertising and instead raise their prices, wall their ecosystems as much as possible. Advertise tablets as "not computers". Come up with buzzy marketing stuff like "retina" for every little detail of their products.