Re: [projectvrm] W3C vs. adtech

[Kevin Cox < >]

Digital fingerprints, when under the control of the user, are of great benefit to organisations - if the organisations provide useful services. 

If a person is willing to supply a fingerprint then this helps the person protect themselves against fraud and it helps protect the seller from fraud. It is thus in the interests of both parties to use reliable digital fingerprints.  Like all data it becomes an issue when the fingerprint is used for purposes over which either party to the transaction is unaware.  Organisations do not want you sharing your fingerprints with others if uniqueness of id is important.  You do not want organisations using your fingerprints to collate other information about you so that they (or others) can target you for purposes that may not be in your best interests.

Digital fingerprints are not going to go away and they will flourish - if they are used the VRM way and are made of use to both parties to a transaction.

Kevin 

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Doc Searls < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

In Mediapost: Supercookies, Digital Fingerprinting Undermine Trust In Web, W3C Says <http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/254275/supercookies-digital-fingerprinting-undermine-tru.html>.

Closing paragraphs:

> The W3C's report comes at a time when the online ad industry appears increasingly interested in using non-cookie technology for tracking. Just two months ago, the self-regulatory group Network Advertising Initiative issued guidance aimed at enabling ad networks to track people with techniques like digital fingerprinting, without violating the group's privacy standards.
>
> The NAI's recent guidance requires ad companies to disclose their use of “non-cookie technology,” in order to inform consumers that rejecting third-party cookies won't necessarily block tracking and ad targeting. (The NAI's longstanding privacy rules require ad companies to inform consumers about behavioral advertising -- regardless of tracking technology -- and allow them to opt out of receiving ads targeted based on Web activity.)
>
> The W3C clearly doesn't agree that the self-regulatory group's guidance will go far enough to protect Web users' privacy. Instead, the W3C is calling on browser developers to create tools that potentially could help users defeat fingerprinting efforts.
>
> The group ends its critique by urging policy makers “to be aware that unsanctioned tracking may introduce privacy, security and consumer protection concerns within their jurisdiction, and to consider appropriate action.”


If we had full individual agency — in other words, elementary VRM — there would be no argument here.

Doc

--

Contact 0413961090