• Nyfure@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The real MVPs are websites not needing a cookie banner because they only use required cookies for which you dont need a banner.

    • manucode@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      They still have to inform you, right? Like with some banner at the edge of the page telling that they use cookies, just no need for a popup asking you to accept or decline.

      • DrCake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        9 months ago

        No it’s only for tracking cookies. If you just have cookies for login, for example, then there’s no need to ask permission

        • Sprucie@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          9 months ago

          And what tells you is how fucked the internet is since almost every single webpage asks to use tracking cookies.

          • Zpiritual@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            9 months ago

            There is also the problem of sites without tracking cookies having banners just to be on the safe side.

  • msage@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Just FYI - it’s mandatory to have a button like that next to the ‘Accept all’.

    Every site that doesn’t do it should be reported.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      If that’s so it’s incredibly poorly enforced to the point where complaining is unlikely to have any effect at all. Most Sites have a button that leads To a secondary menu where cookie preferences can be set. Perhaps this meets the mandate you speak of? It’s a much more common setup.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Or just sites that don’t need a consent popup because they don’t sell your shit.

    • SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      “well, we’re not selling it, we’re just using 247 advertising agencies to measure the general performance of our site. Nothing targeted, we’d never do that.” - totally legit companies that absolutely value user rights

      /s, if that wasn’t obvious enough.

  • cobysev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    9 months ago

    NEVER click decline all. There are loopholes built in that still grant access to “legitimate interest” cookies, which are recognized differently from “consent cookies.” If you click reject all, it still allows collection of certain personal info through cookies labeled legitimate interest. Which is entirely up to advertisers to categorize.

    As annoying as it is, always open up options and manually uncheck cookies.

    • myster0n@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      With TCF 2.2 “legitimate interest” is no longer allowed (but that’s probably only for IAB members). At our company we already had a rule where we disabled all “legitimate interests” from our vendors, so I assume there are other companies that do the same.

      • Nyfure@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        EU Cookie Directive applies to all website owners within the EU aswell as Websites which target EU users.

        It gives clear rules for different categories of cookies like how you need to display them and for which you actually need consent to be allowed to use them.
        It also sets rules for how easy certain actions have to be and granularity.
        (very simplified)

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    Some US news websites still geoblock European visitors rather than fix their site to not track the ever loving fuck out of visitors who say no. So imagine what they’re doing to their domestic visitors.

    • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      I liked it when some news sites did plain text only if you didn’t accept cookies. So no cookies, no ads and don’t have to deal with your crappy css? Why would I ever accept that? It was wonderful.

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    But does it really decline all, or are you agreeing to their “legitimate interest” of stealing your data?

    Data collection is theft, change my mind.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Man the worst I saw was a petrol station, when you walked in up to the tills there was this little sign on a floppy plastic thing that said they had face recognition running and a QR code to scan. The text of the sign mentioned “legitimate interests” but in no way directed users to scan the code and go to the website to object their consent.

        It’s such bullshit. These companies collect up the data we produce and sell it for pure profit, without offering anything in return. The data brokerage industry is worth multiple trillions of $ per year, with only $8bn people in the world it stands to reason that the average user’s data is worth $1,000 per year, but they just pick that out of our pockets and use it against us.

        • Einar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sounds super shady. I’d venture that that would be illegal in Europe.

          • TWeaK@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Thankfully the UK isn’t in any Europe anymore! Just say you’re legitimately interested and you can steal user data without any sort of thing!

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    See our legitimate partners (1724)…

    I don’t want my data sent to 1724 partners just because i am curious to see what that click bait of a title really meant

  • Bransons404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    uBlock origin on Firefox blocks almost all tracking sites. You can enable cookies or disable them, it doesn’t matter because they aren’t sent anywhere. Unless the site has some homebrew tracking solution.

  • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    how certain are you that this will truly block them all? Many of these things may have a “Legitimate interest” thing going on, and I do not trust those prompts to object to that by pressing “reject all”

    • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      RON SWANSON: I reject all cookies.

      Wait, I don’t think I was clear enough. I didn’t ask to reject a lot of cookies. I reject all cookies.

    • voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      legitimate interest is still not a valid legal basis for data collection/tracking in Europe, so it’s not that big of an issue (…but it still allows them to do more they usually can without “legitimate interest”). also most tracking scripts and cookies will be blocked by uBlock anyway