3 ms·
Calling them bugs is just trying to spread FUD. I think a link to a slightly less biased discussion would be better. With clear reasons why they are used, what
by axod 18y ago
Calling them bugs is just trying to spread FUD.
I think a link to a slightly less biased discussion would be better. With clear reasons why they are used, what benefits they have for users, etc
The EFF link used is stupidly outdated and pretty much irrelevant these days - "there is no method of distinguishing Web Bugs from spacer GIFs which are used on Web pages for aligment purposes."
In any event, the use of them is simply because it's easier and less prone to error than the webserver doing the call itself (Also harder for webmasters to tamper etc).
For instance, you could easily setup your webserver to send over information about each visitor to quantcast, doubleclick, google etc etc, and the user would never know. The only issue with that approach would be that quantcast etc would need to trust that the IP etc you're providing is correct, and you're being truthful in terms of page views etc.
You know what the easiest thing for an advertising network to do would be though?
Setup some innocent domains, and host prototype.js etc there. Then tell large websites that use the ad network (Under NDA or something) to innocently link to that version of prototype.js.
- dcancel 18y agoActually not trying to spread FUD at all. I'm the founder of one of the companies detected, Lookery.com, before that Compete.com, which relied on 3rd party clickstream sources. It's not the data that is sent that is a reason for concern but the "cookies" attached to that data especially when unified across sites. Anyway the reason to use the tool is to alert you to what the page your on might be doing. I.e. Visit any popular newspaper site and you'll that beyond web analytics trackers and ad networks your data is being sent to behavioral tracking companies like Tacoda and Revenue Science. Thanks for the comment, ;dc
- axod 18y agoBut considering the fact that you can view a users history with simple css link color hacks... I'm skeptical though. I think the people who are worried about this sort of thing will likely be already using adblock or disabling javascript, 3rd party cookies, 3rd party scripts etc etc.
- dcancel 18y agoYour totally right. If your worried about web bugs you can and probably already run tools like you mentioned. Ghostery is for those of us, like me, who just want to know what ad networks, widgets and other web bugs the sites I visit are using. Cheers, David
- cmars232 18y agoIn theory, I think you could forward traffic to quantcast, doubleclick, etc. but wouldn't this cost more bandwidth?