Re:Grindr to be fined almost €10M over GDPR complaint
by elliekelly on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @08:40AM
(#25915618)
Why is the “opt out cookie” necessary? Why can’t they just assume that anyone who doesn’t have an opt in cookie hasn’t opted in and can’t be tracked? Isn’t the opt out cookie itself a form of tracking? If you have the cookie I know you’ve been to a site I advertise on/track/am affiliated with.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Grindr to be fined almost €10M over GDPR complaint
by notimetorelax on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @09:34AM
(#25916141)
I agree with your point here, it's in spirit of GDPR, unless expressly permitted the sites must assume that the user has opted out. The ad agencies with their cookies have it backwards.
Re:Grindr to be fined almost €10M over GDPR complaint
by privacylawthrow on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @09:00AM
(#25915798)
The opt out cookie was created by ad networks prior to GDPR when many EU countries allowed for opt in by default. The opt out cookie was the tool to allow users to opt out. It still has value today as it allows an ad network to remember a user's choice not to be tracked.
The opt out cookie is set by the advertiser, not the publisher, and the contents of the cookie have generic text like "OPT OUT".