Pointed out that browsers' 'tracking refusal function' has little meaning

by Startup Stock Photos

For those who dislike the website's ability to track user's information without permission, many browsers can set the "Do Not Track" setting. However, the official blog of " DuckDuckGo " which is a search engine holding privacy protection pointed out that "This tracking refusal function has little meaning in practice."

The "Do Not Track" Setting Does not Stop You from Being Tracked

The tracking refusal function is prepared for browsers such as Chrome and Firefox under the pretext of "preventing websites encountered during Internet browsing, information analysis companies, ad networks, providers, internet services, etc. from tracking your actions" It has been.

Although it is very convenient to be able to refuse tracking as a function of the browser itself without checking the privacy settings on individual services, according to DuckDuckGo, unfortunately the browsing refusal function of the browser is not effective about. Actually, the tracking refusal function itself does not have a function to prevent tracking, but it seems to only send a signal voluntarily to the website "this user is refusing tracking".

Nevertheless, many users have set up a tracking refusal function on the browser. The tracking refusal function is often turned off by default, but when DuckDuckGo conducted a questionnaire to 503 adult Americans in November 2018, 23.1% of people turned on the tracking rejection feature I answered that I was doing.

There are not many people who know the fact that many people are turning on tracking refusal but that the tracking refusal function is just sending a signal. Even those who responded that they heard about the tracking refusal function, even those who responded that there is "a little familiar" or more familiar, 44.4% did not know that the tracking refusal function only sends a signal.

DuckDuckGo points out that the property of this tracking refusal function is similar to "setting a sign in the garden" Please do not look at my house "with blinds on. Actually, major IT companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter ignore the signal of the tracking refusal function.

DuckDuckGo insists that the fact that the action actually being done against the name of tracking refusal function has little effect is a big misunderstanding to the user. Also, after taught to the respondents in the questionnaire survey about the action actually done by the tracking refusal function, I asked, "Do you think the IT company should respect the signal of the tracking refusal function?", 75.5% I answered that "Respecting the signal of the tracking refusal function is very important" or "important".

In addition, when asking if the government thinks that regulation "companies must respect the tracking refusal function set by users" is necessary, it seems that 71.9% of people think that it is necessary.

DuckDuckGo expects the government to establish an obligation to the company on the tracking refusal function, but the tracking refusal function itself has been deleted from Safari, a web browser developed by Apple. This flow may reflect the current state that the tracking refusal function is not functioning and it is meaningless.

Apple Is Removing 'Do Not Track' From Safari

in Web Service,   Security, Posted by log1h_ik