5 ms·
It would only make sense to put those along with the cookies. As the intentions of the methods are the same. Cookie = identifier.
by deepstack 5y ago
It would only make sense to put those along with the cookies. As the intentions of the methods are the same. Cookie = identifier.
- qwerty456127 5y agoA user can delete cookies but can't change the fingerprint reliably. Fingerprints also are easier to secretly share between multiple conspiring parties. Using cookies is a legitimate and more-or-less civilized practice, fingerprints are by definition meant to spy on users against their will. Why do we have cookie warnings but no fingerprinting warnings? Browser fingerprinting should be strictly outlawed for non-police use and require a court order. It's more like eavesdropping rather than like cookies.
- progval 5y agoCookies are only mentioned once in the GDPR, as an example in the preamble (paragraph 30). Article 4. defines personal data and identifiers without referencing specific technologies: > (1) ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;
- pgeorgi 5y agoIn the English speaking sphere people get hung up on "cookie laws" because the UK had a specific implementation of such a law in 1998 or so. GDPR and many of the non-UK privacy laws that preceded it in Europe didn't concentrate on cookies but on the user identification concept, but "cookie law stupid" is a meme by now.