[madeofpalk]

Wow, what a horrible, shitting thing to do.

I use Google Analytics for a side project site I run for the video game Destiny. I like to look at referral URLs so I can see if some publication has linked to me, if a video has been made about my site, or if there's a discussion on reddit going on that would be relevant.

I know it's popular to think about the only entities using analytics are big faceless organisations and sending them to graphic porn websites is cool, but please remember that a) they're still just humans and b) people run cute little side projects like mine and I don't want to see tubgirl or whatever when going through my referrals.

Block GA, strip referrals, whatever. I don't care. Just please don't abuse people like this.

[monochromatic]

You're not concerned about my rights. Why should I be concerned about yours?

Seriously--if you're abusing my privacy by tracking me without my consent (without my ACTUAL consent), what makes you think you have any moral claim whatsoever over me?

[platinumrad]

Just because someone violates your rights in some way doesn't mean that you can now do literally anything in response.

I agree that web tracking is pernicious but responding proportionally is important. The person who ends up clicking on that link very well may have no decision making power in their organization. There's a good chance they're some random minimum wage contractor that found the job through a temp agency. Why is it okay for you to subject them to potentially traumatic content?

[jenscow]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

You really don't want to be sending offensive material out to people. you don't know who the recipient could be. The chances are it's just their job, and the decision to track you wasn't theirs.

[sincerely]

Remember how we, as a society, pretty much unanimously decided "it's just their job" wasn't a valid excuse...about half a century ago ?

[platinumrad]

There's a fairly big difference in severity between web tracking and the Holocaust.

[sincerely]

Obviously, but that doesn't change the validity of the argument

[platinumrad]

The point is that "just doing your job" when your job is web advertising does not warrant a (psychologically) violent response while "just doing your job' when your job is the Holocaust does warrant a violent response.

[_khau]

Why is that our problem?

[politician]

(As I asked in the other peer comment, but am curious about your reaction as well) Would it change your mind if the OP were doing it as a form of guerrilla advertising for those sites?

[madeofpalk]

Okay so sending graphic/abusive porn in place of referrer tags to every website you visit is just such a disgusting, fucked up thing to do. Like, if you do this you're objectively a bad person.

If you're doing "guerrilla advertising for those sites" - I just think you're a wanker. It's ineffective and silly.

[harry-wood]

Not "every website you visit". Every website you visit where the developers chosen to use messy URLs for tracking.

[adjkant]

Okay I don't think either of these are really that bad but in no world can you justify a bad action by saying "they made URL's ugly". No.

[matheusmoreira]

The fact of the matter is these referral links are sent to you by the user agent. As the name implies, that program is entirely under the control of the user. Just because the browser makes HTTP requests automatically when loading pages doesn't mean someone can't craft a custom HTTP request with completely made up metadata and send it to your servers.

It's not really any different from random people sending you random links over a messaging service. Would you click on any "interesting" links sent to you by people you don't know, much less trust? It's the same thing. Offensive websites might have shock value but they're actually quite harmless after you close the tab. What if it's a malware site that exploits some 0day in your browser?