dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5978
share rss forum feed


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to Mele20

Re: UTM cookies forced here on Fx and IE! HELP!

said by Mele20:

... It angers me to see the person in front of me pay ONE HALF the price I am about to pay for the SAME item because they have sold their privacy/soul and I haven't. Integrity comes at a high price sometimes and is particularly hard on those who are low income or on fixed incomes. ...

Why does it make you "angry" when someone else pays a different price for something in a store? Is it because you're paying more than them, because you believe the other person is being exploited without their knowledge, or because you believe they lack integrity for participating in something with which you personally believe is unwise? How or where does "integrity" (aka sincerity, honesty) enter into this?
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


Steve
I know your IP address
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5

1 recommendation

said by Blackbird:

Why does it make you "angry" when someone else pays a different price for something in a store?

... because she fancies herself a more suitable judge of what's right for me than I am.


Selenia
I love Debian
Premium
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR
kudos:2
reply to Mele20

Correct me if I am wrong, hun. Don't loyalty cards profile you pretty much the same way? Only difference here is this program throws in a few extra discounts based on interest, while you need a loyalty card to track you for any of the sale prices in many stores. But see, I'd be more concerned about the security of their POS terminals than keeping the fact I love bacon wrapped scallops a secret. But hey, that's just me!
--
A fool thinks they know everything.

A wise person knows enough to know they couldn't possibly know everything.

There are zealots for every OS, like every religion. They do not represent the majority of users for either.



vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Charter

1 recommendation

reply to Mele20

Only once have I been asked to show id in order to get a shopping loyalty card. None of the shopping loyalty cards in my possession has the same name & address. And none of those is my real name or address. I get the special prices, pay with cash (gasp!) and retain my privacy. Travel loyalty cards have my real name and address. But hey, I'm buying travel tix and hotel rooms and rental cars with a CC so there's no privacy rape when using these loyalty cards.



ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to Blackbird

said by Blackbird:

And those impacts will indeed ultimately expand over time as a result of the creativity of marketeers and others...

You can throw in "The right to recourse/complain" as well here.
Sites that power their comments/blogs like "Discus" that actively profile their users comments and rate them could see people at a price disadvantage across multiple stores just for speaking out in particular fashion or ultimately just for speaking out.

said by Blackbird:

"common" marketplace"

Well forget the word "common" why because the shift online changes the landscape from "local" deals to everybody becomes a "Tourist" and the more distance made between retailers and the customer the less value will follow.
Oddly enough, most street markets when in operation are cheeper than the mainstayers offer better produce.

The only upside i see from this is those who's profile extorts the greater value. With everybody already willing to give up their info, "can a leopard mange to change it's stripes".

We saw benefits from being more profile aware on social media on moral/conduct grounds but where's the oppertunity to do any good by classing the disempowered?

said by Mele20:

Integrity comes at a high price sometimes and is particularly hard on those who are low income or on fixed incomes.

New groups of underclass to be determined, not by government, but the whim of business.

Kept the examples to a minimum here cause i don't want seed any idea's nor make it feel more inevitable.


DownTheShore
Mr. Putin, meet SEAL Team 6
Premium
join:2003-12-02
Beautiful NJ
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

1 recommendation

reply to Selenia

said by Selenia:

But see, I'd be more concerned about the security of their POS terminals than keeping the fact I love bacon wrapped scallops a secret. But hey, that's just me!

Ditto that.

You know, there might be a big nice juicy database out there listing all the types of books I buy, my underwear size, what TV shows I watch, which flavor of Pop-Tarts I prefer, who I email with, the fact that I buy a lot of games via Big Fish, etc., etc., etc., but most of that "private" information that is available is stuff I would probably tell anyone who asked anyway (well, maybe not the underwear size - they could research that themselves ).

I understand the concept of wanting to protect one's privacy both online and when shopping in stores, but I realized decades ago that I gave up my privacy the day I got fingerprinted for my federal job, because I could always be physically tracked that way and they could obtain whatever background checks they wanted.

We have let too much of our privacy slip away as a result of the Patriot Act, and we are never going to get that back. We are visually tracked six ways from Sunday now, what with traffic cameras, store cameras, bank cameras, laundromat cameras, etc. Just as I don't scurry like a rat from place to place trying to avoid those cameras, I don't scurry around online trying not to be tracked. I take sensible steps not hand sensitive information over on a platter to all and sundry online, but I don't sweat the small stuff because it's throwaway information anyway. I might love Brown-Sugar Cinnamon Pop-Tarts now, but five years from now, who knows? I may get all bold and switch over to Frosted Strawberry and give the statisticians a thrill.
--
Patriotism is not waving a flag, it is living the ideals

I want to retire to the Isle of Sodor and ride the trains.



ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia

Is down the shore your real name
...........Scurry's away.



DownTheShore
Mr. Putin, meet SEAL Team 6
Premium
join:2003-12-02
Beautiful NJ
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

said by ashrc4:

Is down the shore your real name
...........Scurry's away.

No, but it wouldn't take much effort to find out what it is, because I have included it in PM's to people here and on other forums. My name falls into the "sensible precaution" category. Friends can know it, but I don't use it as a forum name anywhere.


carpetshark3
Premium
join:2004-02-12
Idledale, CO
reply to DownTheShore

One other point - I remember blinking text and all that other crap to get your attention. I don't want it back.

I don't want "in your face ads". If I think a product is crap, it's crap, and I won't buy it. I won't take it if it's free, either. If I think your commercial is BS, then so is your product.

I don't fit my demographic and I'm simply tired of marketers trying to convince me otherwise.



ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to DownTheShore

I see as though you do protect your "targeted advertizing" profile to some degree and after looking at that profile, rightly so.
Facebook just changed it's privacy again to include outside profiling help to target users with offers that come from better understanding a persons profile.

In all likelihood, this is part of Facebook's plan to build up a more precise picture of its many users, targeting advertisements better, and using data not only from its own site but recently acquired companies such as Instagram

The scenario of how much data is required to simply find a market and how much personal info/psychological profiling needs to exist to do this is becoming ridiculous.

While i agree that people should not get too caught up in it.....At what point will it stop evolving in the area's that it has, and how, is most of my concern.

»nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/11···e-email/
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to Mele20

Not sure what the advise on keeping first party cookies should be.
Personally i start off with a clean sandboxed browser containing no cookies only a handful of bookmarks and some common add-ons.
But this has got me thinking on a few levels.
Should we keep specifics cookies for long periods?
How does business view people that do/don't keep them?
Does keeping some older cookies reduce newer metrics being added?
etc.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!

Expand your moderator at work


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to Mele20

Re: UTM cookies forced here on Fx and IE! HELP!

My own practice is to browse by accepting only first-party cookies, and I 'retain' first-party cookies across sessions for only an extremely limited number of sites (involving the need for such cookies to permit persistent log-ins for forums like DSLR). I can do that with Opera by setting it to delete all 'new' cookies upon exiting the browser (which I normally do at least several times a day anyhow), but forcing the few cookies I want Opera to retain to be interpreted as 'old' cookies and thus not be deleted upon exit. Additionally, whenever going to a truly sensitive site, I restart the browser beforehand and again just afterward to make certain there are no unwanted cookies present going into or coming out of that site. It may not be for everyone, but it works well for me.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


Frodo

join:2006-05-05
reply to Mele20

The one thing I find curious about this matter is that a connection to a third party website, googleapis.com, and or google-analytics.com is necessary in order to set the first party UTM cookies. The domain mismatch is very interesting. If delreports had been providing the stuff apparently required from google, then the cookies would have been set.

In my case, the internet connection to google that is needed prevented the cookies from being set in my browser. I have to whitelist cross-domain requests.


OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2

1 edit

1 recommendation

When you work with this site you don't need any third party cookies, any UTM cookies, etc. Block all of them with hosts file. If you want to keep automatic login on this site, all you need is to keep cookies for dslreports.com domain with name bbruid (expires in 1 year) and dsl (expires in 1/2 year).
Edit: fixed typo dsl.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

said by OZO:

When you work with this site you don't need any third party cookies, any UTM cookies, etc. Block all of them with hosts file. If you want to keep automatic login on this site, all you need is to keep cookies for dslreports.com domain with name bbruid (expires in 1 year) and dls dsl (expires in 1/2 year).

Fixed it for you... otherwise, +1.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2

Thank you, Blackbird See Profile


Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5
reply to Mele20

I had simply forgotten that a hosts file (or other privacyware) blocking all Google stuff was necessary in order to block the UTM cookies here. It has been MANY years since I installed HostsMan and entered all Google addresses.

I apologize for not having a perfect memory and for dreaming that just maybe dslr no longer forced one to block Google addresses in a Hosts file or use Ghostery on Fx, Opera, Chrome and Safari in order to block those cookies. I believe it would be far preferable for Justin to simply require a $10 yearly fee from every registered member and then there would be no need to track folks who are registered members here.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

said by Mele20:

I had simply forgotten that a hosts file (or other privacyware) blocking all Google stuff was necessary in order to block the UTM cookies here. It has been MANY years since I installed HostsMan and entered all Google addresses.
...
I believe it would be far preferable for Justin to simply require a $10 yearly fee from every registered member and then there would be no need to track folks who are registered members here.

Since DSLR is definitely not the only site with Google-related cookies, having a good custom hosts file in place (or whatever else might function to similar ends) makes a good practice, just on general principles. While I personally would have no real heartburn with the fee for members as you mention, I don't think such an approach is needed if having the hosts file (or whatever) in place makes sense to block this kind of stuff on any number of other sites anyway.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville

Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5

It has been implied here that anyone blocking the UTM cookies is a "bad" supporter of this site. I simply was making it clear, again, that I would be ok with Justin charging $10 a year to all members here. If blocking UTM cookies here makes me a "bad" supporter of this site then charge me $10 a year and charge everyone here who blocks those cookies. That is all I am saying.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson


OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2

1 recommendation

I disagree with you. Your contribution here is a way far more important, than your UTM cookies or your $10.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...


mysec
Premium
join:2005-11-29
kudos:4

1 recommendation

reply to Dude111

Re:  

said by Dude111:

I wonder what exactly is calling for that cookie to be downloaded??
I just checked my cookie folder and i only have 1 cookie (The main one the site issues)


I think it's being called by a .js file retrieved from google-analytics.com:




Many years ago I investigated the UTM (Urchin Traffic Monitor). The Urchin Software Corporation developed this website traffic analysis tool for web masters. The tool analyzes the content in the web server's log file and creates traffic information statistics on that website based upon the log data.

Google purchased the company in 2005 and formed Google Analytics (GA). Google retained the name "Urchin" and designated the cookies as utm_.




Back then, I discovered that in addition to DSL Reports, the Internet Storm Center (isc.sans.edu), and the Christian Science Monitor (csmonitor.com) also use this analysis tool. In corresponding with the Center and csmonitor.com, I found nothing terribly invasive about this, so I forgot about it. It helps the web master manage the site.

Contrary to what some think, the cookie doesn't track the user from site to site, since it is not a 3rd party cookie (if we can believe the source):

Cookies & Google Analytics on Websites
»developers.google.com/analytics/···es?hl=da

Google Analytics sets or updates cookies to collect data required for the reports. Additionally, Google Analytics mainly uses first-party cookies. This means that all cookies set by Google Analytics for your domain send data only to the servers for your domain. This effectively makes Google Analytics cookies the personal property of your website domain, and the data cannot be altered or retrieved by any service on another domain.


regards,

-rich


Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
kudos:11
reply to Mele20

Re: UTM cookies forced here on Fx and IE! HELP!

said by Mele20:

It has been implied here that anyone blocking the UTM cookies is a "bad" supporter of this site. I simply was making it clear, again, that I would be ok with Justin charging $10 a year to all members here. If blocking UTM cookies here makes me a "bad" supporter of this site then charge me $10 a year and charge everyone here who blocks those cookies. That is all I am saying.

I'm now actually very curious to hear what justin See Profile has to say about what you just said. I hope when he returns he may consider doing so.
--
Remember that cool hidden "Graffiti Wall" here on BBR? After the name change I became the "owner", so to speak as it became: Dustyn's Wall »[Serious] RIP