If there is a modal box I usually right click and get rid of the modal box with dev tools.
That way I never gave any consent.
Nowadays I have browser plugins that do that for me, but same idea.
In any case I block cookies on all sites except for a few whitelisted ones so big "ha" to them if they think they can cookie me up. "Functional cookies" my ass. The sites work just fine without them.
Do you really think those websites actually check if you "gave consent" before tracking you?
It feels good to not agree successfully in the lack of a "I don't agree" button. I block their cookies anyway. :) I need to find better ways to mess with their fingerprinting though, or maybe throw back some bogus cookies at them with badly-formatted data instead of blocking them.
Is this something people do? Is it possible for a user to edit a cookie in a malicious way? Do servers typically trust cookies they have placed on a user's machine?
> Is it possible for a user to edit a cookie in a malicious way?
Obviously, it comes from the user's machine so it can be modified before being sent to the server. Unless you're doing something custom/fancy like signing that data you shouldn't trust that it hasn't been tampered with.
If a model box only has "I consent" and "Learn more" buttons, then I don't consider clicking on "I consent" to mean freely given GDPR consent. Since it's the only reasonable way of viewing the website, and the GDPR doesn't permit a consent-wall, it's non-consent, and any use of my personal data following that event remains illegal.
It's not a problem with the GDPR; it's a problem with the ICO failing to put a stop to this.