Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by capocani 5232 days ago
It's not as if the users set IE to read P3P headers so technically they didn't override any user settings.

P3P is lacking: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/a-loophole-big-enou...

2 comments

So P3P is flawed and IE implements a flawed standard. Granted.

Google is still using this flaw to override the user setting "Do not allow 3rd party cookies" to allow themselves to track users.

There is no "technically" about this, they've misused the standard to override user settings.

Not exactly. The user setting is inaccurate, as it actually should have said "Do not allow 3rd party cookies, except for those from sites which have a code that indicates they aren't tracking cookies or a code we don't understand."

Instead it says "Third Party Cookies" with choices of Accept, Block, or Prompt.

>Not exactly. The user setting is inaccurate, as it actually should have said "Do not allow 3rd party cookies, except for those from sites which have a code that indicates they aren't tracking cookies or a code we don't understand."

That's exactly what they do.

>Instead it says "Third Party Cookies" with choices of Accept, Block, or Prompt.

No, it doesn't.

You sound as if you have researched it, but you seem to be trying to mislead folks by spreading nonsense.

Hmm....you act as if you have looked at it, but you haven't. You simply lie.
Is that really so hard to understand?

Google is intentionally using the loophole. They are intentionally circumventing users’ wishes. That’s nefarious. It’s first and foremost a moral failing. That’s exactly the problem. Just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s right.

That the loophole exists is a separate issue that also has to be remedied – but it doesn’t make Google’s behavior any less evil.