The only reason a company would stop doing that is that they've found something better. They are legally obliged to not make shareholders sad, after all.
Super-cookie crumbles: Verizon vows to kill off hated zombie stalkers
Verizon has backed down over its fingerprinting of subscribers using so-called immortal "super cookies." In 2012, the US mobile telco started injecting unique identifying headers (UIDHs) into every HTTP request users made to websites via the Verizon network. This allowed sneaky ad agencies to recognize people as they moved …
COMMENTS
-
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 15:47 GMT joed
Re: Comcast?
I would not be surprised if Comcast baked cookies of their own. They do seem to "manage" traffic somehow as for a week or so I was unable to check my webmail from home when using FireFox (multiple systems), IE worked "fine" (well, as fine as it can get;) . I had no such problem using very much the same configuration from work network (so proxies and other "helpers" in use).
-
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 06:41 GMT Mike Bell
Weasel words
"As a reminder, Verizon never shares customer information with third parties as part of our advertising programs."
Here's another reminder: Making unique customer IDs available to world + dog every time the user makes a web request anywhere on the web most certainly is sharing customer information with third parties. Get it?
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 10:05 GMT Neil Barnes
Re: Weasel words
Can we have an El Reg poll please?
1) I want to see random adverts, the bigger and flashier the better; there's nothing more attractive to me than a random clickbait site.
2) I want to see adverts based on the sites I've visited and previous purchases I've made; I just bought a fridge but hey, I could sure use another.
3) I can cope with the occasional subtle no-sound no-picture no-animation advert; it doesn't need to track me because I like surprises.
4) As above, but hey, track me. I hate surprises.
5) I came here for the content; I don't want to see adverts unless I search for them.
6) Advertisers are the spawn of the devil and should be cast to the bottomless depths of the ocean.
Inquiring minds want to know!
-
-
-
Sunday 1st February 2015 05:40 GMT Ole Juul
Re: Weasel words
Until you learn that firm is the only provider of something you absolutely need.
For certain values of need. :) Actually, much of what I like, even techie stuff, isn't pushed that hard. Also, I haven't seen a lot of ads for water lately - though that day may not be far off.
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 11:54 GMT Rich 2
Does nobody have any imagination?
God It annoys me that 'internet' seems to be a synonym for 'advertising opportunity'
It's all any web business does. It's just one huge network for grabbing much info as possible from everyone and shoving adverts at them!!
Is this the ONLY business that anyone has managed to come up with? Selling ads? Nothing else?
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 12:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Does nobody have any imagination?
I think the problem is that the Internet is a mature market, as in just about every money angle you can think of is cornered. e-tail? Amazon's pretty much taken the crown there. Video on demand? If it isn't free, it's probably Netflix. Even the vaunted trailblazer, porn, has outlets a plenty.
-
-
Saturday 31st January 2015 16:21 GMT oneeye
Hall of shame,
As always,it should be op-in and not out! But now,how to get word to the vast majority who don't know about this. I seriously doubt that Verizon will notify their customers. And where is the apology? Lol
At least there has been a good effort by the security publications to keep the issue front and center.
-
Sunday 1st February 2015 17:32 GMT GnuTzu
Circumventing a User's Wish to not be tracked should be Legally Dubious
To set super cookies when a user explicitly declines consent to tracking should be legally dubious. The common intent of super cookie use is to circumvent any existing established for normal cookies, which alone should be legally dubious. However, if a user's browser is sending the do-not-track header flag (explicitly set to decline being tracked)--which is an established protocol, then setting any manner of tracking is against what the user has explicitly stated as the absence of consent, and I should think the party setting the tracking would then forfeit the legal standing of their EULA or other terms, explicitly stated or otherwise. That is, if you ignore the user's terms, the user is then not obligated to comply with yours. Keep in mind that no service is obligated to serve you content if they do not agree to your terms; but if they do serve you content then they have some obligation to reasonably attend to the terms that you have explicitly stated by way of a public and commonly established protocol. Of course, IMNAL, but I do believe in the concept of informed consent. And, if things are working in a way that are intentionally designed to be beyond your awareness, then we cannot be said to be reasonably informed or to have given reasonable consent.
-
Sunday 1st February 2015 17:57 GMT GnuTzu
A Culture of Deceit
The problem with the World of advertising is that we permit them to tell lies, at least under the guise of an artful presentation. And, even though there is a concept of false advertising, marketers will attempt any and all means of deceit--up until the point that they are explicitly told that it is illegal. But, this is an age were we can't pass a law without the permission of the corporate lobbyists.
So, news of this sort is just the corporate infrastructure attending to public opinion, and it is only as truthful as it is economically convenient.
-
Monday 2nd February 2015 10:11 GMT Zap
Interesting that there is such a means to monitor people, so 1984 can be switched on in due course.
Many people do not realise that there are LSO cookies which cross browsers and track you. Some retargetting cookies use them when other cookies have been deleted. In Firefox you can get plugin to see them. The sites I see using them a lot include Yahoo, YouTube, & eBay but many others do too, they just edit the default file.
If you use Chrome or any Toolbar or even the Browser toobat search you can expect to be tracked, let's face it, Google is an advertising company, so what do you expect!
Google's attitude is collect the information into the notorious "logs" and figure out later how to make money from it.
-
Monday 2nd February 2015 12:43 GMT Swarthy
What I find Objectionable:
VZW charges their customers about $140 for a 10GB plan. On top of that they are selling user info and they are trying to be able to sell access to their subscribers.
I get the "If the service is free, you are the product"; but this horseshit is taking "Multiple revenue streams" a bit too far. VZW subscribers are paying for the "opportunity" to be products.
- Glad I left when I did.
-
Monday 2nd February 2015 16:32 GMT Tree
They charge more
Where I live, Southern California, Verizon charges about twice what T-Mobile charges. Did not know they offer an added service because sharing to these scumbags is worth it. Do NOT trust them when they say they turned of the turds at Turn who in turn share your info with others. Facebutt will lie about this, too. They change their privacy policy only briefly after being caught.