Text 1739, 97 rader
Skriven 2005-01-03 18:08:50 av Mike '/m' (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Usage history
=========================

From: Mike '/m' <mike@barkto.com>


aw, gee, Rich, you sound like so much sour grapes.  It is so unlike you to be
like this.  Poor ol' Passport got the boot by eBay.  What a shame.  Poor ol'
misunderstood Passport.

 /m

On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 19:19:17 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote:

>   Doing what?  Tracking their ads and the users that view them?  No doubt.
Are there many ad networks that don't?
>
>   www.google.com assigns each user a cookie that looks to have a unique ID
value.  How much do you think this has affected its popularity?  Do you think
they are using cookies for your benefit or theirs?
>
>Rich
>
>  "Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:9naht0dog7hmlkk8s6p88h8iscl7ralnho@4ax.com...
>  I hate doubleclick.  The worst thing is that they are so ubiquitous,
>  even sites I would expect to be honorable, like Charles Schwab, have
>  doubleclick in places.  I never take their cookies but I think they are
>  doing something anyway.
>
>  On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 16:50:38 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
>  <41d894a5@w3.nls.net>:
>
>  >   Cookies can not be PII unless you supply the PII.  That makes them
interesting for marketing purposes but meaningless to identify someone.  And
still, it is the client wholely in control.  I never persist doubleclick
cookies.  In my usage I never honor them at all.
>  >
>  >   Contrary to what you say, identifying yourself in a purchase does not
make their history available to doubleclick.  If your purchase is not from
doubleclick then they have no clue a purchase occured at all unless the folks
from whom you are purchasing are giving away or selling your PII.  Similarly,
the folks from whome you purchase, unless doubleclick itself, have no idea what
your doubleclick identity is unless doubleclick is providing this to them.  And
even if all this happened, you can just delete your local cookies and any
cookie only identity goes away.
>  >
>  >   I don't know why you mentioned jetblue or claim they were fingered by
cookies.  The story to which you refer makes no such claim.  It's claims are
quite clear and quite different.
>  >
>  >Rich
>  >
>  >  "Mike N." <mike@u-spam-u-die.net> wrote in message
news:vqrgt0dte9q55j7bq5bbuoi230b6f5cu2v@4ax.com...
>  >  On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 13:17:36 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote:
>  >
>  >  >   All this is paranoia about what someone could do and has never been
about what actually is done.
>  >  >
>  >  >   Continuing with your paranoia, cookies and auth events are not
available in any single location.  Cookies require you to go to each and every
client,
>  >
>  >    Central ad servers such as DoubleClick are repositories for cookie and
>  >  individual tracking  information through the referrer and site-specific
ad
>  >  trigger.   Now whenever someone identifies themselves through a purchase,
>  >  their entire personally-identifiable history is available from
DoubleClick.
>  >  This is the default cookie configuration which 95% of the population
never
>  >  adjusts or purges.   So while cookie information is not available in any
>  >  single location, it takes only  collaboration by  2-3 sites to reveal all
>  >  the cards.
>  >
>  >    Continuing onto what has actually been done: 1,500,000 people have been
>  >  fingered by cookies under the guise of Homeland Security - Airline
>  >  Passenger Risk Assesment.
>  >
>  >  http://www.computer.org/security/V2n6/anton.htm
>  >
>  >  "Torch's homeland security report explains that it matched the JetBlue
>  >  passenger information database with information purchased from Acxiom to
>  >  determine gender, home specifics (renter or owner), years at residence,
>  >  income, number of children, adult SSNs, occupations, vehicles owned, and
so
>  >  on, for 40 percent of the passengers in the database.2 Torch leveraged
the
>  >  information JetBlue provided (which it claimed was limited) into a much
>  >  larger information corpus by purchasing demographic information from
Acxiom
>  >  to augment the database."
>  >
>  >    It took only 4 organizations: JetBlue, Acxiom, ???(unknown 3rd party),
>  >  and Torch to pull off this fiasco.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)