When you go to a website, if they are GDPR compliant they ask whether you consent to them tracking you. If as a user, I click "Deny", how does that website comply with that request? I as the user am not asked again, which to me indicates they have stored something somewhere, probably via a cookie.
Is this the correct way to obtain and work with GDPR? I would have thought by denying tracking, this would include any cookies.
GDPR legislation pertains primarily to Personally Identifiable Information (PII). Storing dissent in a cookie or localStorage doesn't violate that assuming there isn't anything that identifies the particular user, like trackingConsent=false.
Cookies are not only related to "tracking". They are mostly used to persist the state of the application, like session information or cookie acceptance. It is not gonna work otherwise, only option is to disable them on the browser level, but the legislator chosen to force page owner to do it.
You may provide the page that you are asking about. It quite probably stores your refusal in a cookie or some modern persistent storage. Personally I saw page that after refusal was simply asking again and again.
You may also check by yourself if there are some cookies stored. Depends on the browser, but quite probably f12 button and storage tab.
Related
I'm about to implement cookie consent for a website. As I understand it, cookie consent means that you shall not use cookies before you have received a consent from the user.
How can I know that a user have accepted cookies or not without storing this information in a cookie?
I'm assuming you mean the GDPR. Your understanding of it is incomplete: cookies that are necessary to deliver the site's functionality are allowed without consent. A cookie that merely stores consent is thus allowed, even if the user rejected other cookies.
I am not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc.
I sugest you set a cookie only if the user has accepted cookies. If this cookie is set dont ask again. Otherwise show the cookie consent banner again and again on every new site they visit as if they were new visitors.
What i find strange is that even big german sites like Stern.de, Focus.de, Spiegel,de and even the computer magazine heise.de are setting loads of cookies before they show the consent banner.
Even more strange is that while Stern.de and Focus.de also offer a complicate "Adjust" button (users usuarly dont click them because adjusting cookie preferences on every site is nerve wrecking), Spiegel.de and Heise.de dont even offer this. They just offer "Accept" or pay for a ad free version.
If you click on "Adjust" instead of "Accept" on the first sites they just close the consent banner.
So all the sites dont show a button to easily denie or delete cookies even i thought it has to be as easy to deny as to accept. Im not a lawyer too and this is no legal advice but if they all do it this way i guess this must be legal in Germany even it doesnt make any sence at all. Cookies are set no matter what the visitor does. The big question seems to be what es necessary? Are google Analytics und Adsense and others necessary to finance the server and keep the site online? Necessary cookies are allowed.
Writing this, there is an article in another big news site (that also sets loads of cookies before showing the consent banner and also just offers accept or pay buttons) saying someone had to pay €100 for not asking the visitor for his permission before even loading google fonts not even talking about analytics: https://t3n.de/news/google-fonts-illegal-urteil-dsgvo-1447698/
https://stackoverflow.com/q/70967060/12668719
Analytics Is there a setting on Google Analytics to suppress use of cookies for users who have not yet given consent
Adsense How To Make Adsense Load When Cookie Consent Given?
Check this open source solutionfor the EU cookie law compliance:
https://cookieconsent.osano.com/
The easiest and most effective way is to show a pop-up banner that explains which kind of cookies you want to store and provide an option to allow/disallow each cookie. When clicking Save, you have to handle which cookies were allowed and load them accordingly. Everything can be done in JS.
I have a very specific question about G. Analytics and the GDPR law.
I've read many topics about this, but answers are sometimes contradictory. I would love to have an answer from a G.A. expert or a lawyer.
The GDPR law indicates that we must obtain the user consent before data treatment ; so for me, it would suggest that we must deactivate G.A. tracking as long as user doesn't optin to that treatment.
If I do so : I refresh the page when user has optin, so the data collection can begin ; Problem doing that : we loose the referrer param (since we do a JS refresh, this param is lost : referrer will be the current page)
Others questions :
If I activated IP anonymisation on G.A. : Must I obtain the user consent or can I send the datas by default (and offer the possibility to user for opt-out) ? (many websites seems to have this process, but it seems contradictory with the user-consent obligation...) but this topic suggest to proceed like this.
Regarding cookie law : Is it allowed to store in cookies the user client-id (that G.A. uses) without the user consent ? If not, how to workaround this limitation, and use G.A. without allowing it to set cookies ?
Is there a way to store user activity without sending it to G.A, and when user opt-in -> send all that datas ?
Many thanks in advance !
Disclaimer: Not a lawyer
There are some cookies that can be set without consent (e.g. for security purposes, or perhaps even a preference for cookies). These are generally meant for essential purposes only and not for analytics, functional, or performance purposes.
However, if referrals are a critical part of how your website functions (say for example process discounts if it came from a certain link), it might be considered essential. The lines are bit blurry on what can be considered 'essential', and indeed 'legitimate interest' for non-essential functions.
If you visit websites and look in dev tools, cookies are there immediately even for websites that are showing a cookie consent banner.
-- As for non-cookie technical ways --
I do have a related question that is open to answers on whether non-cookie based tracking technologies fall into the scope of consent - you could potentially send information to the server-side.
You might also use a front-end framework to construct a Single Page Application (although you might not have the option in a company), so that the page is not actually reloaded on a consent click. The consent form can simply trigger a script to run / change a state variable so that information that were stored in JS as variables can now be written into cookies.
I found that the cookie in browser is a random string which web server sends to each client for remembering users' information purpose. But I don't understand in programmers viewpoint, what does cookie use for?
For example, I've used EditThisCookie extension in Chrome Browser to read wikipedia.org site's cookie, in the following picture included here. The value of this cookie (sessionId) is useless for programmers (EDIT: I mean I don't extract any information from this cookie, I know the cookie is very important for web developers, so sorry about my poor expression). If I get this cookie, which kind of information I can understand about the users?
Looking for some help! Thank you very much!
The example about cookie
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m86/dienkun1/cookie_example_zps455f0dad.png
EDIT: Sorry, I've just expressed my problem in wrong way.
Actually, I am going to write an extension for collecting users' preferences via users' cookie, but I can't understand anything what information can be extracted from cookie. I've read about cookie in many documents, like wikipedia, and all of them just show how to get cookie, the definition of cookie, classified... and nothing about which information we can get from cookie.
Thank you very much!
Why do you say that the sessionId is useless for programmers? It actually can be extremely useful. Somewhere on Wikipedia's servers, they're probably storing quite a bit of information about your session. This could include things like whether you've already hidden one of their fundraising banners (so that it won't keep showing it to you again and again), to things that are required for basic functionality, such as what user you are currently logged in as.
However, Wikipedia is storing this same information for millions of sessions. It needs a way to tie the information back to each individual browser. That sessionId is how it does so. It set the sessionId in a cookie when you first accessed the page, and that cookie gets sent back to the server with every request you make to it now. Then they have code on the back end that reads that sessionId from the cookie and uses it to look up all of the information specific to your session, and do whatever needs to be done with it.
You could of course store the session information itself in the cookies, but there are a couple problems with that. First, there are limits on the size of each cookie, and on the overall size of all cookies for a single domain. Some of the data you want to store might not even fit. But the bigger problem is that cookies can be very easily manipulated by the end user. If you stored the information of who the user is logged in as in a cookie, the user could just change that value to something else, and suddenly be logged in as someone else! Of course, it's also possible that the user could change their sessionId to be some other user's session and suddenly be logged in as them. That's why session IDs need to be as random as possible, and should be long enough that guessing someone else's is basically impossible.
Well, why would someone bother writing a sessionId to a cookie if it's useless?
Cookies are extremely useful when it comes to (e.g) identifying users on your site so you can have them logged in right away, count their visits, track them on your site and even beyond.. only to name a few use cases.
To cite a somewhat popular site (wikipedia.org):
Cookies were designed to be a reliable mechanism for websites to remember stateful information (such as items in a shopping cart) or to record the user's browsing activity (including clicking particular buttons, logging in, or recording which pages were visited by the user as far back as months or years ago).
The most important word here is "stateful".
I know a new cookie law was suggested (see here). But did it ever become required? And what's the penalty for not complying?
We have placed cookies on your computer to help make this website better. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.
The ICO's website now shows that users must opt out, not opt in. The quote above shows how they have implemented it on their site.
This means that the best idea is probably to have a banner at the top of your site showing a similar message to theirs. If the user doesn't want to use cookies, they can disable them in the browser themselves. It's not up to the site owner to implement a cookie deletion policy, it would seem.
According to new EU laws I have to ask my users to opt into having cookies installed on their computers.
So every time I want to set a cookie I have to see if the user has opted in and if they haven't I shouldn't set the cookie.
When they come to the website a popup will ask if they want to opt in. Should they click "no" I cannot put a cookie on their computer to say they've clicked no. How do I then know, as they go through the website, that they've clicked "no"?
Do I just have to show the popup every page they go to? Or store it in a session variable? (is using sessions still ok under the new law? I assume a cookie is set with the session key?).
Thanks
I'm not a lawyer but I've been reading up on this recently and it is quite clear under the new regulations not every cookie is considered equal and opting in is not required for all of them.
The regulations are most keen on ensuring that cookies that allow tracking of users actions/data between websites must have an opt in, at the other extreme, cookies that contain no personal information and are, for example, only used for security on one particular site (like a session cookie) may not need permission at all.
The UK ICO website has some very clear pages & PDFs (including: http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/privacy_and_electronic_communications.aspx) on the subject and is definitely worthwhile visiting.