歐盟更新了對於 Cookie 同意方式的準則

TechCrunch 上面看到的,歐盟更新了對於 Cookie 同意方式的準則:「No cookie consent walls — and no, scrolling isn’t consent, says EU data protection body」,英文版的 PDF 文件可以在「Guidelines 05/2020 on consent under Regulation 2016/679」這邊看到。

這篇準則主要是在說明,什麼情境下取得的「同意」才是有效的。主要在在說明使用者與開發者權力不對等的情況下,GDPR 會擋下哪些對使用者不利的情況。

準則文件裡開頭的地方先解釋了什麼是 free/freely given,然後給了不少範例,另外翻例子的時候還看到在雇傭關係下因為員工有無法拒絕的壓力,這時候的同意也未必是有效的,藉以保護員工...

而 TechCrunch 的文章則是拉出了兩個目前在 internet 上很常用的情況來報導 (cookie wall 與 scrolling),解釋現在 internet 上面常用的這些方法在 GDPR 下並沒有取得授權。

這樣的話 Medium 的 login wall 應該也會踩到 (強迫你要註冊 Medium 才能看,這邊會需要同意 Medium 的使用條款),這次歐盟文件算是蠻清楚的,多幾次訴訟,再讓 GDPR 跑個幾年,應該有會有不同的方法了...

Brave 出手檢舉 Google 沒有遵守 GDPR

Brave (從 Chromium 分支出來的瀏覽器) 檢舉 Google 沒有遵守 GDPR 的規定:「Formal GDPR complaint against Google’s internal data free-for-all」。

主要是「purpose limitation」這個部份,出自「REGULATION (EU) 2016/679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 27 April 2016」:

1. Personal data shall be:


collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes; further processing for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes shall, in accordance with Article 89(1), not be considered to be incompatible with the initial purposes (‘purpose limitation’);

比較重要的是 specified 與 explicit 這兩個詞,GDPR 規定必須明確指明用途,而可以從整理出來的文件「Inside the black box」裡的「Purported processing purpose」看到大量的極為廣泛的說明。

Google 應該會就這塊反擊認為這樣的描述就夠用,就看歐盟決定要怎麼做了...

Google 用 x-client-data 追蹤使用者的問題

前陣子 Chromium 團隊在研究要移除 User-Agent 字串的事情 (參考「User-Agent 的淘汰提案」),結果 kiwibrowser 就直接炸下去,Google 很久前就會針對自家網站送出 x-client-data 這個 HTTP header,裡面足以辨識使用者瀏覽器的單一性:「Partial freezing of the User-Agent string#467」。

Google 的白皮書裡面是說用在 server 的試驗:

We want to build features that users want, so a subset of users may get a sneak peek at new functionality being tested before it’s launched to the world at large. A list of field trials that are currently active on your installation of Chrome will be included in all requests sent to Google. This Chrome-Variations header (X-Client-Data) will not contain any personally identifiable information, and will only describe the state of the installation of Chrome itself, including active variations, as well as server-side experiments that may affect the installation.

The variations active for a given installation are determined by a seed number which is randomly selected on first run. If usage statistics and crash reports are disabled, this number is chosen between 0 and 7999 (13 bits of entropy). If you would like to reset your variations seed, run Chrome with the command line flag “--reset-variation-state”. Experiments may be further limited by country (determined by your IP address), operating system, Chrome version and other parameters.

但因為這個預設值開啟的關係,就算關掉後也足以把使用者再分類到另外一個區塊,仍然具有高度辨識性,不是你 Google 說無法辨識就算數。

另外如果看 source code 裡的說明:

    // Note the criteria for attaching client experiment headers:
    // 1. We only transmit to Google owned domains which can evaluate
    // experiments.
    //    1a. These include hosts which have a standard postfix such as:
    //         *.doubleclick.net or *.googlesyndication.com or
    //         exactly www.googleadservices.com or
    //         international TLD domains *.google. or *.youtube..
    // 2. Only transmit for non-Incognito profiles.
    // 3. For the X-Client-Data header, only include non-empty variation IDs.

可以看到 *.doubleclick.net*.googlesyndication.comwww.googleadservices.com 全部都是廣告相關,另外 Google 自家搜尋引擎是直接提供廣告 (不透過前面提到的網域),YouTube 也是一樣的情況,所以完全可以猜測 x-client-data 這個資料就是用在廣告相關的系統上。

The Register 在「Is Chrome really secretly stalking you across Google sites using per-install ID numbers? We reveal the truth」這邊用粗體的 Update 提到了 GDPR 的問題,不確定是不是開始有單位在調查了:

Updated Google is potentially facing a massive privacy and GDPR row over Chrome sending per-installation ID numbers to the mothership.

在這個問題沒修正之前,只能暫時用操作 HTTP header 的 extension 移掉這個欄位。

荷蘭認為 Cookie Wall 不符合對 GDPR 的規範


Cookie Wall 指的是不同意接受 cookie policy 就無法使用網站的限制,像是這樣的東西:

在「Cookie walls don’t comply with GDPR, says Dutch DPA」這邊看到荷蘭認為 Cookie Wall 不符合 GDPR 的規範:

Cookie walls that demand a website visitor agrees to their internet browsing being tracked for ad-targeting as the “price” of entry to the site are not compliant with European data protection law, the Dutch data protection agency clarified yesterday.


台固的網域名稱轉出到 Gandi,以及 GDPR...

看到 othree 的「TFN 域名轉出」這篇,剛好前陣子把 git.tw 也轉到 Gandi 上,也遇到一樣的問題... 以往的經驗是網域註冊商會提供 authorization code,但台固的系統是讓你自己輸入,懂這點後就好處理了:

所以結論是,TFN 域名轉出時要輸入的移轉中密碼其實就是給使用者自訂 authorization code,而且還有個蠻短的長度限制 XD

另外是因為 GDPR 所以看不到 whois 資料了,像是 othree 提到的 markdown.tw

gslin@GSLIN-HOME [~] [14:32/W2] whois markdown.tw
Domain Name: markdown.tw
   Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Administrative Contact:
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Technical Contact:
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Record expires on 2020-03-07 (YYYY-MM-DD)
   Record created on 2011-03-07 (YYYY-MM-DD)

   Domain servers in listed order:

Registration Service Provider: GANDI SAS

我自己的 git.tw 也是:

gslin@GSLIN-HOME [~] [14:34/W2] whois git.tw
Domain Name: git.tw
   Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Administrative Contact:
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Technical Contact:
      Not displayed due to GDPR

   Record expires on 2019-05-23 (YYYY-MM-DD)
   Record created on 2008-05-23 (YYYY-MM-DD)

   Domain servers in listed order:

Registration Service Provider: GANDI SAS

這樣就有點麻煩了,以後如果要聯絡的話只剩下 DNS 內的 SOA record