5 ms·

Lovely that their blog with privacy propaganda has a cookie banner that is not compliant with any privacy law in any way. Says everything about their efforts, I

Lovely that their blog with privacy propaganda has a cookie banner that is not compliant with any privacy law in any way. Says everything about their efforts, I guess.

yodsanklai 2y ago
Can you explain?
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  An “accept” only cookie notice isn’t generally permissible in the EU. They may be serving more compliant versions based on geolocation, though. > To help personalize content, tailor and measure ads and provide a safer experience, we use cookies. By clicking or navigating the site, you agree to allow our collection of information on and off Facebook through cookies.
- miken123 2y ago
  Many reasons: - They are not asking for consent, there is just an ok button. - They assume consent when you navigate further on the site, this is not valid consent. - Consent needs to be for specific, well defined purposes. “help personalize content, tailor and measure ads and provide a safer experience” are three purposes in one and none of them are well defined. - They are probably already setting the cookies in your first request, when you have not seen any information yet (did not check)
Phemist 2y ago
It was a trap. Clickbait to get every privacy-minded tech enthusiast on their site. Now, simply because they interacted with the page, facebook, in their opinion, gets a blank cheque to track you wherever they wish, on and off-site.
- xvector 2y ago
  Having actually worked for Meta in both security and privacy capacities, I guarantee you that it's really not that conspiratorial. No one wrote this article with the intention of "trapping privacy-minded tech enthusiasts." I mean no offense, but this sort of thinking (that an engineering blog is attempting to attack you) is unhinged. There is not some grand conspiracy. Companies like this are not the shadowy, highly-competent and absolutely evil entities you think they are. They are barely functional to begin with.
  - Terretta 2y ago
    > I mean no offense, but this sort of thinking (that an engineering blog is attempting to attack you) is unhinged. There is not some grand conspiracy. “You know, since we're trying to Z but don't have Y, we could probably use X to get Y…” said no inventive engineer ever. No conspiracy needed. This happens.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
      X to get Y happens. A tech company using a blog to get whatever imaginary consent from random anonymous privacy-aware individuals is so many levels of unhinged that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
      - Terretta 2y ago
        The company wouldn't. Someone retroactively realizes they have the data, and then it does. I'm certainly not saying it happened, or will happen, here. I'm saying it definitely happens. This is why in regulated industries, there's an emphasis on "data minimization". Much like the principle of least privilege, but applied to whether you're letting your people or systems be exposed to it in the first place. It's easy to follow a least privilege policy if there's an actual technical control not just agreement, and even easier if the control is "I never had it, didn't derive it, and made sure I couldn't if I wanted to". If you aren't collecting it for any use, even inadvertently, you can't retcon it into availability for alternative uses.
        xvector 2y ago
        > Someone retroactively realizes they have the data, and then it does. This simply isn't within the realm of reason. Engineers at Meta have far more impactful problems to solve than attempting to reverse engineer the browsing habits of the 12 privacy-sensitive tech enthusiasts reading their engineering blog. From a ROI/time perspective, it is far in the negative for a single junior Meta engineer to spend even 10-20 minutes investigating this. It literally is not worth anyone's time.
  - 2y ago

Lovely that their blog with privacy propaganda has a cookie banner that is not compliant with any privacy law in any way. Says everything about their efforts, I guess.

yodsanklai 2y ago

Can you explain?

ceejayoz 2y ago
An “accept” only cookie notice isn’t generally permissible in the EU. They may be serving more compliant versions based on geolocation, though. > To help personalize content, tailor and measure ads and provide a safer experience, we use cookies. By clicking or navigating the site, you agree to allow our collection of information on and off Facebook through cookies.
miken123 2y ago
Many reasons: - They are not asking for consent, there is just an ok button. - They assume consent when you navigate further on the site, this is not valid consent. - Consent needs to be for specific, well defined purposes. “help personalize content, tailor and measure ads and provide a safer experience” are three purposes in one and none of them are well defined. - They are probably already setting the cookies in your first request, when you have not seen any information yet (did not check)

Phemist 2y ago

It was a trap. Clickbait to get every privacy-minded tech enthusiast on their site. Now, simply because they interacted with the page, facebook, in their opinion, gets a blank cheque to track you wherever they wish, on and off-site.

xvector 2y ago
Having actually worked for Meta in both security and privacy capacities, I guarantee you that it's really not that conspiratorial. No one wrote this article with the intention of "trapping privacy-minded tech enthusiasts." I mean no offense, but this sort of thinking (that an engineering blog is attempting to attack you) is unhinged. There is not some grand conspiracy. Companies like this are not the shadowy, highly-competent and absolutely evil entities you think they are. They are barely functional to begin with.
- Terretta 2y ago
  > I mean no offense, but this sort of thinking (that an engineering blog is attempting to attack you) is unhinged. There is not some grand conspiracy. “You know, since we're trying to Z but don't have Y, we could probably use X to get Y…” said no inventive engineer ever. No conspiracy needed. This happens.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
    X to get Y happens. A tech company using a blog to get whatever imaginary consent from random anonymous privacy-aware individuals is so many levels of unhinged that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
    - Terretta 2y ago
      The company wouldn't. Someone retroactively realizes they have the data, and then it does. I'm certainly not saying it happened, or will happen, here. I'm saying it definitely happens. This is why in regulated industries, there's an emphasis on "data minimization". Much like the principle of least privilege, but applied to whether you're letting your people or systems be exposed to it in the first place. It's easy to follow a least privilege policy if there's an actual technical control not just agreement, and even easier if the control is "I never had it, didn't derive it, and made sure I couldn't if I wanted to". If you aren't collecting it for any use, even inadvertently, you can't retcon it into availability for alternative uses.
      - xvector 2y ago
        > Someone retroactively realizes they have the data, and then it does. This simply isn't within the realm of reason. Engineers at Meta have far more impactful problems to solve than attempting to reverse engineer the browsing habits of the 12 privacy-sensitive tech enthusiasts reading their engineering blog. From a ROI/time perspective, it is far in the negative for a single junior Meta engineer to spend even 10-20 minutes investigating this. It literally is not worth anyone's time.
- 2y ago