Spyware heats up the debate over cookies

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by ronjor, Aug 15, 2005.

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

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    news.com
     
  2. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    Well, I'm not surprised by this article, it was predictable that this would happen.
    As I said in other posts : cookies don't need to be removed by AS scanners and websites with tracking cookies only, don't belong in Hosts Files either.

    Cookies are harmless text files and are readable with any text processor. So there are no secrets.
    The good guys have to pay of course. Isn't that normal when the bad guys abuse cookies ? It's always like that.
    Good cookies are indeed usefull for business people and have nothing to do with stealing private information.

    I don't think that users will change their attitude towards cookies, it's already too late and people have been scared enough about cookies (rightly or wrongly).
    People don't change their habits that easily and they don't make a distinction between good and bad cookies, they make a distinction between usefull and useless cookies.

    I use CCleaner to keep my good cookies and to remove all the rest (good or bad).
    Business men might need my good cookies, but I don't need them.
    Let them find other ways to maintain their commercial statistics and let them start a fight against cookie removers.
    I have already troubles enough to keep my computer clean.
     
  3. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    When I visit Best Buy, they ask me for my zipcode. Best Buy can, if they wish to annoy me, ask me for this private information. I, as a human being with free will, have the right to say no.

    Similarly, web site owners can, if they wish to annoy me, try to invade my privacy by collecting information about me (which is the thrust of this article). They can even try to convince me that it is for my own benefit (the Tom Sawyer twist), but I know how to clean out my cookies and I do, because I am not interested in giving up any privacy so that Amazon can make more money.

    Rich
     
  4. Vikorr

    Vikorr Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Posts:
    662
    Yep, I really can't see any benefit whatsoever in cookies (except you need them to sign in to forums and the likes).

    If the advertisers suffer, that hardly bothers me at all...I personally don't understand why anyone would pay for advertising on the net...apart from travel/car/auction sites etc where you would visit it specifically to see the advertising...but they don't 'need' cookies.
     
  5. Rmus

    Rmus Exploit Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Posts:
    3,943
    Location:
    California
    I was surprised at the concern by business over cookie-managing programs. One doesn't need a third party program - browsers have offered that for quite a while.

    I surveyed 7 friends - not a good sample, perhaps, because all are Opera users. None have cookies enabled unless a site requires it (Yahoo mail). All have Opera set to delete cookies on exit. All keep just a few permanent cookies.

    I keep only two permanent cookies - my bank, and Amazon, where I do a lot of purchasing, and it's just two clicks to make the purchase because of the cookie.

    So, along side the statement, "Internet users are taking back control of their computers," should be, "Many users never gave up control."

    -rich
    ________________
    ~~Be ALERT!!! ~~
     
  6. mmmmcookies

    mmmmcookies Guest

    I dont have a problem with first party cookies provided that they do (and legally I wish - COULD) not turn around and sell the information. After all I visited the website so I think of it like caller ID. But third party cookies have no place being placed on someone's machine 'on behalf of' a site that doesn't belong to them. This type of deceptive partnership is what gives cookies a bad name. Not all cookies are bad but since they are often distributed in that sort of fashion they're always going to have a bit of a bad name associated with them.
     
  7. Lets never forget that Spyware began with Cookies. An once webmasters realized they could exploit the public and make money from selling information it was off to the races with building even more spyware.
    Stored cookies have no place on an honest website. Stored Cookies are for tracking purposes only an no other purpose. Session cookies can do the job needed on any website.
    If a webmaster wants to have an honest and trustworth site first he must get rid of the Stored Cookies an if not then he is as bad as the worse spyware vendor out there. Stored Cookies do nothing to enhance the use of a website by its vistors.
    Never under any conditions will Stored Cookies be trustworthy. It just can not happen. Anyone who is willing to actually believe that Cookies are for the betterment of the internet should shut down their computer and find a nice hobby.
     
  8. Trekk

    Trekk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Posts:
    90
    Location:
    Ohio
    Microsoft had a good idea. A few years ago they gave away a free computer with a 1 year dialup agreement. In exchange for a free system, you had to put up with some pop-ups etc. Not a bad deal for the average home user.


    Trekk
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.