Microsoft To Stop Enabling 'Do Not Track' By Default 64
An anonymous reader writes: The history of the do-not-track setting for web browsers has been rife with debate. It took a long time for web experts to come to anything resembling a consensus on how it should be implemented, and the process isn't over yet. Microsoft took criticism for enabling the do-not-track setting by default in Internet Explorer. While it sounds good in theory, many worried it would just spur websites to completely disregard the setting (and some, like Yahoo, did just that). Now, Microsoft has reversed their stance. The do-not-track setting will not be enabled by default in the company's future browsers. They say, "Put simply, we are updating our approach to DNT to eliminate any misunderstanding about whether our chosen implementation will comply with the W3C standard. ... As a result, DNT will not be the default state in Windows Express Settings moving forward, but we will provide customers with clear information on how to turn this feature on in the browser settings should they wish to do so."
How many sites actually honor DNT? (Score:2)
My understanding was that DNT has mostly been a failure, though I don't know how much of that has to do with IE's default behavior. Am I wrong about that? Are there lots of sites out there honoring the DNT setting?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And more fundamentally: (Score:2)
Opt-in is the right thing to do.
Opt-out is the wrong thing to do
If some action of yours is "optional," let the user CHOOSE if they want it done; don't inflict it on them and assume that's ok. EVER.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally maybe but in reality not quite.
But this does introduce the question of EU privacy laws. Would ignoring the do not track flag put those companies in the same boat as the companies like Facebook that seems to be in some trouble for ignoring their own tracking opt out.
I'm not sure if the EU law would cover this as while it is implicit it isn't a direct notification to the companies. This might allow some wiggle room. Any one know for sure?
Re:How many sites actually honor DNT? (Score:5, Informative)
I work in the internet advertising industry and the big exchanges do respect it. In fact, if companies that work with them don't follow DNT they can get booted.
Mind you this is just the more legit companies though.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Seconding that. I've certainly spent enough sprints working on good opt-out handling.
It's mostly big advertisers that respect DNT because 1) they have something to lose and 2) they have the resources to bother. Probably the main websites you actually visit don't care, but the ads that show up on them do. With DNT on you might see more repeats of ads, because they can't limit how many times they show you one, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you know how it is. The over-the-top scumbag marketers gives the remaining 1% a bad name.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay now, hold up a second. Almost everyone here is complaining about how they assume every company ignores DNT, because it's easy and profitable to ignore. Key word "assume".
I don't see a lot of horror stories, or any evidence that any major company at all really is ignoring DNT (except like...with Chrome, or Facebook, but then that's Facebook and what do you expect). I do see people who actually know the industry saying otherwise, and the TOC for the big networks agree with them. Advertising is mostly big
Re:How many sites actually honor DNT? (Score:4, Informative)
My understanding was that DNT has mostly been a failure
It failed because Microsoft deliberately sabotaged it. DNT was supposed to be an affirmative indication of customer preference. But instead, Microsoft set it automatically in their browsers, prompting most websites to ignore it, since it no longer meant anything.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It never meant anything anyway, but that as an aside...
No, Microsoft did not 'automatically' set it. Though that may depend on one's definition of 'automatic'.
Does an installer 'automatically' install adware, if you miss unchecking the option "Install Slowbar for Chrome"?
If yes - you have a point.
If no - then there wasn't anything automatic about it. Enabling Do Not Track
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So you're claiming that there are people who actually want to be tracked wherever they go on the Internet?
Oh, you must work for an advertising company, right?
Re: (Score:2)
So you're claiming that there are people who actually want to be tracked wherever they go on the Internet?
Once the advantages and disadvantages are explained, yes, most people are fine with it. It means websites remember their preferences, and remember what content they have already read. It also means they are more likely to see ads for things they are interested in, rather than something random. Disadvantages? I don't see any, other than silly paranoia, since the NSA, and anyone else that intents to harm you, doesn't abide by it anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
Website preferences have nothing to do with DNT.
Re: (Score:2)
It also means that the content sites they visit make a hell of a lot more money. 10x as much is not an unreasonable estimate, and is sometimes low. Generally means that the sites are higher quality. But that's more tragedy-of-the-commons, and less of a direct effect.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
DNT was DOA.
What site in their right mind would actually honor - and I mean fully, including through any third party content (and yes by that I mean ads) or 'accidental' methods via supercookies / sharing of information at the backend of several sites within one's control - something that's merely a 'request' by a user (regardless of whether they were semi-automatically opting into making that request) and has no legal stick behind it?
If anything, Microsoft making it the default in Windows' installation exp
Re: (Score:3)
My understanding was that DNT has mostly been a failure, though I don't know how much of that has to do with IE's default behavior. Am I wrong about that? Are there lots of sites out there honoring the DNT setting?
Agreed. Besides, it turns out that the default for web servers for their DNGAF option (Do Not Give A Fuck) is also enabled.
Re: (Score:1)
IE's default behavior was just an excuse to ignore users' tracking preferences. Whether companies like yahoo will continue to ignore users' explicit preferences remains to be seen.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.netmarketshare.com... [netmarketshare.com]
Re:What is this IE you speak of? (Score:4, Informative)
Firefox doesnt look so hot when you look at the number of CVEs, particularly remote code execution:
http://www.cvedetails.com/prod... [cvedetails.com]
http://www.cvedetails.com/vers... [cvedetails.com]
It beats IE 11 by a small margin in RCEs, but loses in total vulns. Its really not that great of a browser, lacking common security mechanisms like plugin isolation.
Re: (Score:3)
It's far more effective to simply disable the means of tracking you.
And far more impossible. How do you propose to stop a webserver from logging your visit or knowing your IP?
Re: (Score:2)
They can log *a* visit, and know *an* IP, but they can't uniquely identify you versus the 1,753 other people at that Starbucks today.
Re: (Score:1)
They can with browser fingerprinting. It's easy and you don't even need cookies enabled to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is, but since all those followers don't want to use this technique but instead prefer Javascripts and cookies on the sites you visit they make it quite easy for you: use plugins like Ghostery to block them.
Trust is not a solution (Score:1)
What does it matter (Score:1)
when websites completely ignore do-not-track, and browsers like Chrome and Safari send all your usage-stats to Google and Apple whether you like it or not.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Notice the future of IE (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that's not what they say. The write (quote) 'As a result, DNT will not be the default state in Windows Express Settings moving forward'.
Windows Express Settings is used by IE; sure. But it may also be used to set up Spartan.
Re: (Score:2)
From TFA:
"Microsoft is changing how Do Not Track (DNT) is implemented in future versions of our browsers"
In fact, the only mentions of IE in TFA are where they are discussing the previous behavior.
"The new Microsoft"? (Score:2)
How about asking? (Score:2)
How about making part of the browser installation a check for whether DNT's been set one way or the other, and if it hasn't then prompt the user for how they want it set? It's one dialog during the first installation with a track/do-not-track answer (with no default button so just pressing Enter without thinking won't do anything), and then there's no ambiguity whatsoever about whether the DNT status is the user's choice or not.
Re: (Score:2)
That's (Windows) (Express Settings), not (Windows Express) (Settings). I'm pretty sure it applies to the small number of settings you're forced to click through when you first configure your machine, and the presence of a setting in that set doesn't mean they're hiding other settings in the system.