Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Feb 2012 22:44 UTC
Privacy, Security, Encryption According to Microsoft, Google is circumventing the P3P third party cookie standard. P3P is kind of an odd standard (complex, not user-friendly, and it requires some serious computer knowledge to know what the heck it actually does and means), but hey, what the heck. Of course, Microsoft rides on the coattails of what happened over the weekend, and it's clear PR because not only has this been known for years, Google is - again - not the only one doing this; Facebook, for instance, does the same thing (and heck, Microsoft's own sites were found guilty). Still, this is not acceptable, and even if it takes Microsoft PR to get there, let's hope this forces Google and Facebook to better their ways.
Thread beginning with comment 507966
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: expectations
by arpan on Tue 21st Feb 2012 08:31 UTC in reply to "RE: expectations"
Member since:

ummm... if they were using it only for the +1 button and not for tracking, could they not have used the P3P standard to specify that, and then IE would have accepted that and allowed them to set a cookie?

Not sure if it is possible, but it seems like it ought to be.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: expectations
by ichi on Tue 21st Feb 2012 10:59 in reply to "RE[2]: expectations"
ichi Member since:

According Facebook's statement about P3P they apparently don't even bother with it because they consider it obsolete and not worth caring about. I guess Google are on the same boat.

Going by the posts in the TRUSTe blog, webs that implement some kind of P3P do so for the same reasons they had to add specific js conditions back in the day: so IE doesn't break on their site.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: expectations
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 21st Feb 2012 18:12 in reply to "RE[3]: expectations"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

I did have to do something similar with P3P years ago to get IE to work. Don't remember what it was specifically ( something with cookies to keep a user logged in when moving between two obviously closely related virtual hosts on the same box), but I wasn't doing anything to violate anyone's privacy. The site didn't track anyone doing anything.

Reply Parent Score: 2