Do Not Track default feature in IE 10 makes Digital Advertising Alliance unhappy

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by guest, Jun 1, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    I have very serious doubts I'm in the minority in regards to thinking custom HOST files are ineffective. Otherwise, they'd be recommended by every "newbie friendly" computing/tech site out there in security articles. When almost all of the recommended basic security practices are, by the security sector's own admission, no longer as effective or not effective at all to rely on, what exactly is a list of domains that is updated even every other week going to do?

    No disrespect, but I don't buy it. We just don't operate in that kind of environment anymore. A few years ago, sure, now, no way would I recommend such "protection". Having MDL in, let's say, Adblock+, sure, I see no issue with that whatsoever. But not even MDL can find them all.
     
  2. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    BrightFort would not offer support for a Hosts file if it was a redundant software package. If you have specific points other than blanket statements, I would be glad to read them.
     
  3. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    My points were already made though. Malware listings (excluding MDL itself, which is still not perfect) change far too frequently to be used in any sort of filter list such as a host file. As far as ad servers go, I get it, it can be used for that. However I feel that they are not as efficient as say, AdBlock+ and its alternatives. Host files for blocking ad servers aren't redundant if you choose not to use another available method, no argument there.

    I've used HOST files off and on since the early part of the decade, so I'm not saying this stuff simply because I have some personal thing against them. We differ in opinion, no disrespect or argument meant.
     
  4. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    I agree with DW. The arguments for host files being ineffective are largely the same for why an AV isn't effective. Except pretty much worse in every way. A decent layer, I used one on my router for a while, but I wouldn't rely on it ever.
     
  5. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    In the final analysis - it depends whether MS ships IE10 with DNT on by default or not

    I would probably prefer off by default so as not to block what I may want to see. This will all pan out when IE10 goes to RTM.
     
  6. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    It will be off by default, due to complaints. I'll hunt the link down if I can.

    Edit: Here you go: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/06/default-do-not-track/
     
  7. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    Not quite yet as MS and the W3C are hashing this out as I type. ;)

    That would be one of the originating links pointing to IE10 TPL. Among the links I previously posted.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2012
  8. JRViejo

    JRViejo Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    68,004
    Location:
    U.S.A.
  9. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
  10. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,171
    I wonder if the DNT header will be sent in the requests associated with Update Checking, Customer Experience Improvement Program, Flip Ahead, Microsoft Location Service, SmartScreen Filter, and Suggested Sites.
     
  11. Pinga

    Pinga Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Posts:
    1,420
    Location:
    Europe
    Speaking of blanket statements... ;) But I agree. Too bad this 'discussion'
    is framed in terms of powerful multinational versus powerful alliance, not exactly an open debate. The use of pathetic language and fin du globe scenarios is hardly a replacement for such a discussion.
     
  12. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,380
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Yet Microsoft has done nothing wrong, it has followed the specification correctly.

    From the spec at:

    http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#determining

    Implied decision is allowed - the express setup option in IE10 informs the user that DNT will be set to on by default.

    Cheers, Nick
     
  13. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    Top admen beg Microsoft to switch off 'Do Not Track' in IE 10
    As I've said previously of late in this thread and in observance of Nick Rhodes statement, MS has done no wrong in offering this service. The onus is on the user to opt out in the event certain sites cannot be reached via Do not track.

    Article
     
  14. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    In Amsterdam, A Lack of Consensus on Do Not Track
    BEHAVIORAL TARGETING
    Article
     
  15. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
    The Do Not Track standard has crossed into crazy territory
    Article
     
  16. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    "Do Not Track" is little more than a joke, as is any measure that relies on voluntary compliance. Their own words prove it:
    The only thing the DNT header does is identify you as one who values privacy as opposed to one who doesn't care. In our present climate, valuing your privacy is construed as suspicious.

    The only semi-effective "Do Not Track" measures are those that make it impossible or much more difficult, and only if those measures are under your control. If you don't want Facebook or Google tracking you, block their IP ranges outright. If you don't want tracking data stored on your PC, make the areas they use "read only" or sandboxed and deleted on exit. Don't want scripts digging out identifiable info? Block them. Don't count on any single method, application, extension, etc. Use several. It's no different than implementing a layered approach to security except that it moves faster and changes more.
     
  17. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    That was absolutely hilarious yet concerning reading. However, that's exactly how the "powers that be" react these days when you try to fight them. Noone_Particular seems to be right, going by that response. DNT does seem to be a lost cause. I still disagree with those that say legislation will enforce it. No, it won't, not as long as these major companies hold the sway they hold. If they aren't required to respect DNT and if they want marketing to be excluded, what is the point of DNT?
     
  18. siljaline

    siljaline Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,618
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.