Greetings to Sanetters:
After reading that earlier post on "cookies", I turned off this feature in
my browser. I have been really surprised at all the places that use
"cookies" - not once, but multiple times while perusing a site. I'm very
happy I turned off this feature!
I also found that for one place I wanted to get info from, if I didn't let
them have their cookie, I got ZIP from them (i.e., website feeds you back
into a special window where they ask for even MORE info).
Beware! Be informed. Use the technology if you choose, just don't let it use
YOU.
diane
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu [mailto:owner-sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu]On
Behalf Of Misha
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 1:56 PM
To: SANET-mg
Subject: Privacy, Internet use
Howdy, all--
Sometime ago there was a discussion of the use of cookies and other Web
mechanisms to translate your Web browsing into a source of market research
for corporations. I had pointed out that folks should exercise caution in
using "free" list-server sources like OneList, for the "freedom" they offer
generally costs you something.
Below, an item from USATODAY.com; thought it might interest those of you
who care about privacy, new media use, etc. This is why I keep the Cookies
feature OFF on my browser. Always.
It is methods like these by which multinational corporations get control
of the food system, consolidate markets, and engineer consumer
consciousness. I do not believe that "playing along" is effective--the
medium is the message, and the message of the mass media is consumption at
all costs. To resist that means also coming up with resistance forms of
communication, that speak to the parts of people who wish to disengage from
this planet-gobbling culture in which we're immersed.
Are you aware that some Web advertising/marketing companies consider it
"shoplifting" for someone to put software on their computer that blocks
banner ads from appearing when you call up a Web page that has those?
Seriously. The advertisers get individual Web sites to put their ads on
their sites, saying, we'll "give" you Thing X in return for you placing this
banner on your page. So now, everywhere you turn, the hucksters are waving
crap in your face, shrieking "Buy! Buy! Consume! Eat up the earth!!!" And if
you determine that you choose not to turn your attention to them, that's
"shoplifting."
In my view, the ability to determine where to put one's attention (what to
consume with the eyes/ears) is just as fundamental as the ability to
determine what to consume with the mouth. I not only don't want Tony the
Franken-Tiger in my breakfast bowl or belly, I don't want the fuzzy mutant
in my daily attention-scape.
Remain vigilant. Resist much. Obey little.
peace
misha
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
01/25/00- Updated 05:17 PM ET
Activists charge DoubleClick double cross
Web users have lost privacy with the drop of a cookie, they say
By Will Rodger, USATODAY.com
Say goodbye to anonymity on the Web.
DoubleClick Inc., the Internet's largest advertising company, has begun
tracking Web users by name and address as they move from one Web site
to the next, USATODAY.com has learned.
The practice, known as profiling, gives
marketers the ability to know the
household, and in many cases the precise
identity, of the person visiting any one of
the 11,500 sites that use DoubleClick's
ad-tracking "cookies."
What made such profiling possible was
DoubleClick's purchase in June of Abacus
Direct Corp., a direct-marketing services
company that maintains a database of
names, addresses, telephone numbers and
retail purchasing habits of 90% of
American households.
With the help of its online partners,
DoubleClick can now correlate the
Abacus database of names with people's
Internet activities.
Company spokeswoman Jennifer Blum
said Tuesday that only about a dozen sites
are participating now. But she
acknowledged that DoubleClick would
like all its partner sites to participate.
DoubleClick defends the practice,
insisting that it allows better targeting of
online ads -- and thus makes consumers'
online experiences at once more relevant
and more profitable for advertisers. The company calls it
"personalization."
Consumer advocates have another term for it: privacy invasion.
After being informed of DoubleClick's actions, several privacy activists
said
they would file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission
next
month.
"This is a blatant bait-and-switch trick," says Jason Catlett of
Junkbusters
Inc., an Internet-privacy consultancy. "For four years they have said
(their
services) don't identify you personally, and now they're admitting they
are
going to identify you."
To tie Doubleclick's "anonymous" records of your surfing habits to its
Abacus database, it needs only the cooperation of another site that can
identify you positively.
Futuristic though that sounds, positive identification is actually
simple.
DoubleClick need only tie your cookie to another one placed by a site
that
ships you something through the mail, or one which requires
registration.
To do that:
DoubleClick sends a cookie to your browser and gives it a unique ID
number.
Doubleclick sends the same ID number on to the site that knows who you
are.
That company then sends back the data that DoubleClick needs to look
you up in the Abacus database.
And voila -- DoubleClick knows who you are, too.
The combination of DoubleClick's cookie-derived information -- more than
100 million files -- with Abacus' database on the purchasing habits of
90
million households means the vast majority of Web-connected Americans
will likely lose their online anonymity, says David Banisar, deputy
director of
Privacy International.
DoubleClick's Blum said she was not sure whether surfing habits tracked
by
DoubleClick before Abacus data are merged will be included in future
profiles.
DoubleClick executives maintain they still give users who don't want to
be
tracked a chance to opt out.
"That person will receive notice that their personal information is
being
gathered," DoubleClick Executive Vice President and Abacus unit chief
Jonathan Shapiro says flatly.
Yet, that chance to opt out comes only in the form of a few lines of
text
placed in the privacy policies of participating Web sites. Since those
policies
are often buried two or three levels down, online consumers will seldom
know what is being done with their personal information in the first
place, let
alone that they may opt out, activists say.
"That is not permission," Banisar says. "That is fraudulent on its
face."
Catlett, Banisar and the Electronic Privacy Information Center plan to
file a
complaint with the Federal Trade Commission by Feb. 16.
They say they will charge that DoubleClick has duped consumers by
suggesting the company's technology lets them remain anonymous. They
expect to enlist a wide array of consumer groups to back their position.
Further troubling to privacy advocates is DoubleClick's refusal to say
which
Internet sites are furnishing them the registration rolls that
DoubleClick needs
to link once-anonymous cookies to names, addresses, phone numbers and
catalog purchases.
"The fact that DoubleClick is not disclosing the names of the companies
who
are feeding them consumers' names is a shameful hypocrisy," Catlett
says.
"They are trying to protect the confidentiality of the violators of
privacy."
Shapiro Tuesday bristled at Catlett's characterization. Any company that
uses data from the Abacus database to target Internet ads must disclose
it
online, he says.
Moreover, he adds, DoubleClick itself would hand over to privacy
advocates the list of participating companies if it could. But as in
many lines
of business, partners frown when their relationships are disclosed
without
their permission, he says.
"If they all bought a billboard and said they work with us, that would
be
great," Shapiro says.
The controversy over DoubleClick began last summer, when the company
announced it was buying Abacus Direct in a deal valued at more than $1
billion.
Privacy experts had feared that DoubleClick would begin merging the two
databases at some point. But they say they were unaware that DoubleClick
had begun its profiling practice late last year.
Before its Abacus purchase, DoubleClick had made its money by targeting
banner advertisements in less direct ways.
DoubleClick ad-serving computers, for instance, check the Internet
addresses of people who visit participating sites. Thus, people in their
homes
may see ads different from those seen by workers at General Motors, or a
machine-tool company in Ohio.
Every time viewers see or click on those banners, DoubleClick adds that
fact to individual dossiers it builds on them with the help of the
cookies it
drops on users' hard drives.
Those dossiers, in turn, help DoubleClick target ads more precisely
still,
increasing their relevance to consumers and reducing unnecessary
repetition.
Those cookies remained anonymous to DoubleClick until now.
Being tracked as they move around the Web "doesn't measure up to
people's expectation on the Net," says Robert Smith, publisher of the
newsletter Privacy Journal. "They don't think that their physical
locations,
their names will be combined with what they do on the Internet. If they
(DoubleClick) want to do that they have to expose that plan to the
public
and have it discussed."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michele Gale-Sinex
Home office: 415-504-6474 (504-MISH)
Home office fax: Same as above, phone first for enabling
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you want me again,
look for me under your boot soles. --Walt Whitman
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 06 2000 - 12:00:27 EST