ASP.NET Core 2.1
I think this gets set automatically. How do I prevent that?
Just came across the same issue. My 100% cookie-free website had a cookie, created by ASP.NET Core.
As #mark-g pointed out in his comment, it is mainly added to support GDPR: Let users of your web page opt-in/out for the allowance to collect and keep data about them.
In all usual cases I'd recommend to go this route as designed by Microsoft. Keep the ASP.NET cookie and make use of the _CookieConsentPartial.cshtml for all personal data you might want to keep about the users.
In my special case, I have a very simple web page. No data is collected, also not from any third parties. I dont need the cookie consent and the ASP.NET cookie. In this case, can remove this cookie just by commenting out one line:
In Startup.cs comment out the line:
// app.UseCookiePolicy(); No cookies used at all!
Then clear all caches and remove the cookie, reload the page and it is gone.
Related
I am very confused as to how Safari ITP 2.3 works in certain respects, and why sites can’t easily circumvent it. I don’t understand under what circumstances limits are applied, what the exact limits are, to what they are applied, and for how long.
To clarify my question I broke it down into several cases. I will be referring to Apple’s official blog post about ITP 2.3 [1] which you can quote from, but feel free to link to any other authoritative or factually correct sources in your answer.
For third-party sites loaded in iframes:
Why can’t they just use localStorage to store the values of cookies, and send this data back and forth not as actual browser cookie headers 🍪, but as data in the body of the request or a header like Set-AuxCookie? Similarly, they can parse the response to updaye localStorage. What limits does ITP actually place on localStorage in third party iframes?
If the localStorage is frequently purged (see question 1), why can’t they simply use postMessage to tell a script on the enclosing website to store some information (perhaps encrypted) and then spit it back whenever it loads an iframe?
For sites that use link decoration
I still don’t understand what the limits on localStorage are in third party sites in iframes, which did NOT get classified as link decorator sites. But let’s say they are link decorator sites. According to [1] Apple only start limiting stuff further if there is a querystring or fragment. But can’t a website rather trivially store this information in the URL path before the querystring, ie /in/here without ?in=here … certainly large companies like Google can trivially choose to do that?
In the case a site has been labeled as a tracking site, does that mean all its non-cookie data is limited to 7 days? What about cookies set by the server, aren’t they exempted? So then simply make a request to your server to set the cookie instead of using Javascript. After all, the operator of the site is very likely to also have access to its HTTP server and app code.
For all sites
Why can’t a service like Google Analytics or Facebook’s widgets simply convince a site to additional add a CNAME to their DNS and get Google’s and Facebook’s servers under a subdomain like gmail.mysite.com or analytics.mysite.com ? And then boom, they can read and set cookies again, in some cases even on the top-level domain for website owners who don’t know better. Doesn’t this completely defeat the goals of Apple’s ITP, since Google and Facebook have now become a “second party” in some sense?
Here on StackOverflow, when we log out on iOS Safari the StackOverflow network is able to log out of multiple sites at once … how is that even accomplished if no one can track users across websites? I have heard it said that “second party cookies” still can be stored but what exactly makes a second party cookie different from a third party?
My question is broken down into 6 cases but the overall theme is, in each case: how does Apple’s latest ITP work in that case, and how does it actually block all cases of potentially malicious tracking (to the point where a well-funded company can’t just do the workarounds above) while at the same time allowing legitimate use cases?
[1] https://webkit.org/blog/9521/intelligent-tracking-prevention-2-3/
I am not sure if the below answers are correct, please comment if they are not:
It seems applications can use localStorage with no problem, up to 7 days. But it won’t be persisted across multiple enclosing domains. I would even recommend using sessionStorage, since the goal is just to have nothing more than a seamless session. You can then roll your own cookie mechanism using a different set of headers, the only thing you can’t implement is http-only cookies.
They can, but ITP won’t let the JavaScript on the enclosing page store cookies (at least, not if your third party domain was flagged as a tracker by Safari).
Yeah, the description of “link decoration” technically doesn’t mention this workaround, but probably Apple has or will update its classifier to handle this workaround.
Yes, if a first-party webpage will send a request to the server and it sets a cookie in the response headers, then these aren’t blocked by ITP, even if it has an iframe to a tracking site. They say that’s not their goal.
Yes, in fact your first-party site can just let your site redirect to google.com and back quickly (like with oAuth) and thereby inform Google of whatever you wanted, without cookies. Google’s JavaScript can do this as well, if you allow it. Then the JavaScript can just load your google-hosted subdomain in an iframe and set a cookie that persists for years, tracking the user. However, ITP 2.3 seems to have also added mitigation to this, so you might use A records instead? https://cookiesaver.io/archives/analytics-guides/cname-cloaking-mitigation-eliminates-safari-itp-workarounds/
Probably the StackExchange network uses a version of #5
I need to track unregistered users in my Django website. This is for conversion optimization purposes (e.g. registration funnel, etc).
A method I've used so far is using IP address as a proxy for user_id. For various well-known reasons, this has led to fudged/unreliable results.
Can I sufficiently solve my problem via setting a session variable at server-side? An illustrative example would be great.
For example, currently I have a couple of ways in my head. One is doing request.session["temp_id"] = random.randint(1,1000000), and then tracking based on temp_id.
Another is setting a session variable every time an unauthorized user hits my web app's landing page, like so:
if not request.session.exists(request.session.session_key):
request.session.create()
From here on, I'll simply track them via request.session.session_key. Would this be a sound strategy? What major edge-cases (if any) do I need to be aware of?
Cookies are the simplest approach, but take into consideration that some users can have cookies turned off in their browsers.
So for those users you can use javascript local storage to set some data. This information will get deleted once you close the browser, but it's ok for funneling purposes. Still others can have javascript turned off.
Another approach would be to put custom data(key) in every link of the page when generating the template. in other words you would have the session_id stored in html page and send through url parameters at click. Something similar happens with csrf token. Look into that.
I work for an e-commerce site. Part of what we do is to offer customized items to some clients. Recently some non-technical management promised that we could incorporate our check-out process into one such client's website. The only way we've figured out how to do this is by using an iframe (I know, I don't like it either). The issue is that most customers of this site are unable to check out because we use cookies to determine which custom items to display. Browsers are recognizing our cookies as third party and almost everybody has third party cookies turned off, as they should. I'm going to be shocked if the answer is yes, but is there any workaround for this? ie can the site hosting our iframe somehow supply the necessary cookie?
Try an invisible, interstitial page.
Essentially the hosting site would issue a redirect to a site within your domain, which is then free to set cookies (because at this point is is actually the first party). Then your site immediately redirects back to the hosting site. At this point your newly-created cookies will be invisible to the hosting site but visible to your iFramed page henceforth.
Unfortunately the hosting site will have to do this every time a cookie is to be updated but the double-redirect can happen so quickly they'll hardly notice. Hopefully your system only needs the cookies to be set once.
Instead of using a cookie, pass the information in the each url request as name/value pairs.
It is a bit of a pain to add the name/value to every url...I know...oh well...it will work.
I'm going to be shocked if the answer is yes, but is there any workaround for this? ie can the site hosting our iframe somehow supply the necessary cookie?
Your iframed page itself, which is the third party in this scenario, could send a P3P Cookie Policy header – some browsers then accept third-party cookies by default, whereas others (mainly Safari) will not be convinced to do so at all if not by the user manipulating the default settings themselves.
What you could also do, is pass the session id not (only) by cookie, but as a GET or POST parameter as well – f.e. under PHP this can be done quite easily by configuring the session options. You should consider if that’s worth the slightly increased risk of session stealing.
The interstitial page solution should work but it might be a lot of trouble for your hosting site, so here's another solution that will allow you to work cookieless.
Write an HttpModule that responds to the BeginRequest event, reads the querystring, and inserts corresponding cookie headers into the Context.HttpRequest object (Note: you can't use AddCookie, you have to use AddHeader, because cookies added by a module directly are disposed of before they hit your application proper). That way the hosting site can simply issue a request (within the iFrame) that contains the necessary value in the querystring, the module will convert it into a cookie (that only exists in memory, not on the wire), and your application will be deceived into thinking that there's a cookie there. No code changes required, you just need to add the module in web.config.
This only works if you are using IIS 7.0+ in integrated pipeline mode. If you're on an earlier version of IIS or if you have to run in classic mode, you'll need an ISAPI filter instead.
Ryan , John
For the Chrome v80 update with SameSite flags, want to set the samesite=none;secure for the site hosting our iframe and somehow supply the necessary samesite=none;secure cookie. We have apache 2.2 and tomcat 6 setup, so would appreciate a solution and advice on how to make it work. Currently with flag enabled the iFrame is not punching out successfully.
Thanks
I've read all the other q's here regarding the topic but couldn't solve my problem.
I'm setting on my website the email of the user in the localStorage and i want to retrieve it in the extension.
localStorage.setItem("user", "andrei.br92#gmail.com" );
But when i try to receive it with the chrome extension it fails to do so
value = localStorage.getItem("user");
Which way is easier ? cookies localstorage ? im not pretentious
Please see this:
http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/content_scripts.html#host-page-communication
Content scripts are run in a separate JavaScript world, which means the content script's localStorage is different from the website's localStorage. The only thing the two share is the DOM, so you'll need to use DOM nodes/events to communicate.
Use chrome.storage.local instead of localstorage. Content scripts using chrome.storage see the same thing that the extension page sees. More at https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/storage.html
Please see the information on Chrome content scripts. I'm betting you fell into the same initial trap that I did -- trying to read localStorage from an page-injected script, yes?
You do not want to use cookies when localstorage can do. That is because
Cookies can be accessed/modified through background page only.
Cookies are stored in context of a url/domain and not extension. So you will have to store a cookie for every domain that you wish to operate upon.
With every HttpRequest all the cookies associated with corresponding url/domain gets transmitted to server, so in effect you will be adding overhead to user's requests.)
I have an interesting conundrum.
We have a site that is a completely separate domain, we'll say http://www.x.com and our own site that is http://www.y.com. The y.com site is actually a classic ASP site, and we aren't converting it to .NET at this time.
The problem is that there is a link on x.com that redirects to y.com from a members area. We want to "authenticate" the user to make sure they are a member from the other site. If they are, they are directed to a members area on y.com. If not, they have to provide login information on y.com.
Cookies obviously don't work due to the cross domain security, but is there a way around this? I've also looked at a service for tokens, but I'm not sure exactly how that works in Classic ASP. Any ideas or suggestions?
What I did when I needed to pass information cross domain what so hash the information into one variable and pass the url/page as another variable as a post into a page on the y.com. That page would unhash the data, set the cookies and session variables, and then do a redirect or server.transfer to the page that was passed. The same can work going from y.com to x.com.