3 ms·
The reason for the redirect is probably so that they can change the URL without reprinting the menus. For example, if a small business changes who they get to d
by rlpb 3y ago
The reason for the redirect is probably so that they can change the URL without reprinting the menus. For example, if a small business changes who they get to do their online ordering system, sometimes that involves a URL change because coordinating the transfer of control of domain registration, DNS (and consequently sometimes email) and website hosting, and preserving the old URLs (or even just the entry point) on the new system is too difficult.
I don't think the lack of redirects would really resolve anything either. You either trust that the QR code you're scanning was really generated by the organisation you think it was, or you don't. If you trust them then you can also trust their redirects.
- psychphysic 3y agoThen they can redirect via their own domain... Why I troduce a third party?
- solardev 3y agoI think you overestimate the tech savvy of your average restaurant
- rlpb 3y agoYour average small business don't control "their own domain". They have some IT or marketing company managing it for them. The problem comes when they want to switch supplier, and either the losing or winning subcontractor doesn't want, or more often doesn't have the ability, to facilitate a seamless handover. When you're a supplier of something related, you don't want to be caught up with this, so in this case for example I speculate that one reason a marketing company providing QR codes will use a redirect is to avoid having to say "sorry we can't change the URL without reprinting".
- bob-09 3y agoDoes Squarespace or Wix provide you your own link shortener and analytics for scanned codes? Your average restaurant owner is not likely going to pay an IT consultant extra money to operate a link shortener for them on the GoDaddy domain they bought in 2006.
- falsenapkin 3y agoI buy the first paragraph. Disagree on the 2nd though for two reasons: 1: The codes are outside in a public space. They could easily be replaced, I do not trust them. 2: Even if I trust the code is what the business intended to produce doesn't mean that I would like to consent to the privacy policy of or provide any information to the 3rd party they chose. The 2nd point is made worse by how in some cases there isn't an option to decline. And do some QR code readers do a pre-fetch or fully resolve the rendered domain/URL? I would take a bet yes.
- rlpb 3y ago> The codes are outside in a public space. They could easily be replaced, I do not trust them. This applies whether there's a redirect in place or not. If you're in the "False Napkin Restaurant", and they have QR codes that take you to falsenapkin.com, I could just register falsenapkinrestaurant.com and replace the menus. Ordinary people will have no way of knowing the difference. > doesn't mean that I would like to consent to the privacy policy of or provide any information to the 3rd party they chose That's an issue regardless of whether there's a direct client-side redirect or if there's just some Javascript inclusion going on that was provided by a third party but without an explicit redirect. Either way, your data can be used by whoever the restaurant has contracted and your ability to consult their privacy policy remains the same.
- falsenapkin 3y agoSorry my headspace for disagreeing is in QR codes shouldn't be the menu. Yes to the point of removing redirects does not solve malicious replacements with look-alike domains. I think in the case of a direct link with 3rd party JS though I mean there are tools that can prevent that while still providing access to the menu. If my content blocker blocks the QR code providing service then I can't get a menu. If my content blocker blocks 3rd party non-functional JS then whatever, I don't notice.
- rlpb 3y agoSounds like you want a client-side redirect blocker :-)