dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
6354
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17

OZO to Blackbird

Premium Member

to Blackbird

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

Thank you, Blackbird See Profile
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI

Mele20

Premium Member

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.

Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium Member
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN

Blackbird

Premium Member

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.
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI

Mele20

Premium Member

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.
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17

1 recommendation

OZO

Premium Member

I disagree with you. Your contribution here is a way far more important, than your UTM cookies or your $10.
mysec
Premium Member
join:2005-11-29

1 recommendation

mysec to 19579823

Premium Member

to 19579823

Re:  

said by 19579823:

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/an ··· 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 Member
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
·Carry Telecom
·TekSavvy Cable
Asus GT-AX11000
Technicolor TC4400

Dustyn to Mele20

Premium Member

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.