Text 1727, 248 rader
Skriven 2005-01-02 19:19:16 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 1724 av Ellen K. (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Usage history
=========================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01A7_01C4F0FF.F418A8C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Doing what? Tracking their ads and the users that view them? No =
doubt. Are there many ad networks that don't?
www.google.com assigns each user a cookie that looks to have a unique =
ID value. How much do you think this has affected its popularity? Do = you
think they are using cookies for your benefit or theirs?
Rich
"Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in message =
news:9naht0dog7hmlkk8s6p88h8iscl7ralnho@4ax.com...
I hate doubleclick. The worst thing is that they are so ubiquitous,
even sites I would expect to be honorable, like Charles Schwab, have
doubleclick in places. I never take their cookies but I think they =
are
doing something anyway.
On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 16:50:38 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
<41d894a5@w3.nls.net>:
> Cookies can not be PII unless you supply the PII. That makes them =
interesting for marketing purposes but meaningless to identify someone. = And
still, it is the client wholely in control. I never persist = doubleclick
cookies. In my usage I never honor them at all.
>
> Contrary to what you say, identifying yourself in a purchase does =
not make their history available to doubleclick. If your purchase is = not
from doubleclick then they have no clue a purchase occured at all = unless the
folks from whom you are purchasing are giving away or selling = your PII.
Similarly, the folks from whome you purchase, unless = doubleclick itself, have
no idea what your doubleclick identity is = unless doubleclick is providing
this to them. And even if all this = happened, you can just delete your local
cookies and any cookie only = identity goes away.
>
> I don't know why you mentioned jetblue or claim they were fingered =
by cookies. The story to which you refer makes no such claim. It's = claims
are quite clear and quite different.
>
>Rich
>
> "Mike N." <mike@u-spam-u-die.net> wrote in message =
news:vqrgt0dte9q55j7bq5bbuoi230b6f5cu2v@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 13:17:36 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote:
>
> > All this is paranoia about what someone could do and has never =
been about what actually is done.
> >
> > Continuing with your paranoia, cookies and auth events are not =
available in any single location. Cookies require you to go to each and =
every client,
>
> Central ad servers such as DoubleClick are repositories for =
cookie and
> individual tracking information through the referrer and =
site-specific ad
> trigger. Now whenever someone identifies themselves through a =
purchase,
> their entire personally-identifiable history is available from =
DoubleClick.
> This is the default cookie configuration which 95% of the =
population never
> adjusts or purges. So while cookie information is not available =
in any
> single location, it takes only collaboration by 2-3 sites to =
reveal all
> the cards.
>
> Continuing onto what has actually been done: 1,500,000 people =
have been
> fingered by cookies under the guise of Homeland Security - Airline
> Passenger Risk Assesment.
>
> http://www.computer.org/security/V2n6/anton.htm
>
> "Torch's homeland security report explains that it matched the =
JetBlue
> passenger information database with information purchased from =
Acxiom to
> determine gender, home specifics (renter or owner), years at =
residence,
> income, number of children, adult SSNs, occupations, vehicles =
owned, and so
> on, for 40 percent of the passengers in the database.2 Torch =
leveraged the
> information JetBlue provided (which it claimed was limited) into a =
much
> larger information corpus by purchasing demographic information =
from Acxiom
> to augment the database."
>
> It took only 4 organizations: JetBlue, Acxiom, ???(unknown 3rd =
party),
> and Torch to pull off this fiasco. =20
------=_NextPart_000_01A7_01C4F0FF.F418A8C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.3790.1289" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Doing what? Tracking =
their ads=20
and the users that view them? No doubt. Are there many ad =
networks=20
that don't?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> <A=20
href=3D"http://www.google.com">www.google.com</A> assigns each user a = cookie
that=20
looks to have a unique ID value. How much do you think this has =
affected=20
its popularity? Do you think they are using cookies for your = benefit
or=20
theirs?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Ellen K." <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com">72322.enno.esspe=
ayem.1016@compuserve.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:9naht0dog7hmlkk8s6p88h8iscl7ralnho@4ax.com">news:9naht0dog7h=
mlkk8s6p88h8iscl7ralnho@4ax.com</A>...</DIV>I=20
hate doubleclick. The worst thing is that they are so=20
ubiquitous,<BR>even sites I would expect to be honorable, like Charles =
Schwab,=20
have<BR>doubleclick in places. I never take their cookies but I =
think=20
they are<BR>doing something anyway.<BR><BR>On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 16:50:38 =
-0800,=20
"Rich" <@> wrote in message<BR><<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:41d894a5@w3.nls.net">41d894a5@w3.nls.net</A>>:<BR><BR>&=
gt; =20
Cookies can not be PII unless you supply the PII. That makes =
them=20
interesting for marketing purposes but meaningless to identify =
someone. =20
And still, it is the client wholely in control. I never persist=20
doubleclick cookies. In my usage I never honor them at=20
all.<BR>><BR>> Contrary to what you say, identifying =
yourself in a purchase does not make their history available to=20
doubleclick. If your purchase is not from doubleclick then they =
have no=20
clue a purchase occured at all unless the folks from whom you are =
purchasing=20
are giving away or selling your PII. Similarly, the folks from =
whome you=20
purchase, unless doubleclick itself, have no idea what your =
doubleclick=20
identity is unless doubleclick is providing this to them. And =
even if=20
all this happened, you can just delete your local cookies and any =
cookie only=20
identity goes away.<BR>><BR>> I don't know why you =
mentioned=20
jetblue or claim they were fingered by cookies. The story to =
which you=20
refer makes no such claim. It's claims are quite clear and quite =
different.<BR>><BR>>Rich<BR>><BR>> "Mike N." <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:mike@u-spam-u-die.net">mike@u-spam-u-die.net</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:vqrgt0dte9q55j7bq5bbuoi230b6f5cu2v@4ax.com">news:vqrgt0dte9q=
55j7bq5bbuoi230b6f5cu2v@4ax.com</A>...<BR>> =20
On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 13:17:36 -0800, "Rich" <@>=20
wrote:<BR>><BR>> > All this is paranoia =
about what=20
someone could do and has never been about what actually is =
done.<BR>> =20
><BR>> > Continuing with your paranoia, =
cookies and=20
auth events are not available in any single location. Cookies =
require=20
you to go to each and every client,<BR>><BR>> =
Central=20
ad servers such as DoubleClick are repositories for cookie =
and<BR>> =20
individual tracking information through the referrer and =
site-specific=20
ad<BR>> trigger. Now whenever someone identifies=20
themselves through a purchase,<BR>> their entire=20
personally-identifiable history is available from =
DoubleClick.<BR>> =20
This is the default cookie configuration which 95% of the population=20
never<BR>> adjusts or purges. So while cookie =
information=20
is not available in any<BR>> single location, it takes =
only =20
collaboration by 2-3 sites to reveal all<BR>> the=20
cards.<BR>><BR>> Continuing onto what has =
actually=20
been done: 1,500,000 people have been<BR>> fingered by =
cookies under=20
the guise of Homeland Security - Airline<BR>> Passenger Risk=20
Assesment.<BR>><BR>> <A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.computer.org/security/V2n6/anton.htm">http://www.compu=
ter.org/security/V2n6/anton.htm</A><BR>><BR>> =20
"Torch's homeland security report explains that it matched the=20
JetBlue<BR>> passenger information database with information=20
purchased from Acxiom to<BR>> determine gender, home =
specifics=20
(renter or owner), years at residence,<BR>> income, number of =
children, adult SSNs, occupations, vehicles owned, and =
so<BR>> on,=20
for 40 percent of the passengers in the database.2 Torch leveraged=20
the<BR>> information JetBlue provided (which it claimed was =
limited)=20
into a much<BR>> larger information corpus by purchasing =
demographic=20
information from Acxiom<BR>> to augment the=20
database."<BR>><BR>> It took only 4 =
organizations:=20
JetBlue, Acxiom, ???(unknown 3rd party),<BR>> and Torch to =
pull off=20
this fiasco. <BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_01A7_01C4F0FF.F418A8C0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|