FAQ

Here are a few of the questions we have heard about the Cookie Clearinghouse.

How does the Cookie Clearinghouse relate to Do Not Track?
There are many different tools to help users make privacy decisions online. Right now, the Cookie Clearinghouse and Do Not Track are both in progress, and will both help users manage online tracking. In the future, after there is a published Do Not Track Recommendation from W3C, the Cookie Clearinghouse will evaluate how best to incorporate Do Not Track.

Is the Cookie Clearinghouse a seal program?
No. Unlike a seal program, the Cookie Clearinghouse does not make any judgments about websites, and does not certify websites.

How long will it take before accept-lists and block-lists are available?
We hope to complete Phase I in a few months (by Fall 2013.) Once the lists are in place, it will take time to populate them. Browsers choosing to use the lists will need time to test them before releasing them widely. While we will all work diligently and quickly, it is likely to take months before the entire system is live in a web browser. Browser plugins and addons may be available more quickly.

Who can use accept-lists and block-lists?
We will publish accept-lists and block-lists for anyone to use. We will not charge any fees.

What else would you like to know or tell us about the Cookie Clearinghouse? Please let us know!

3 comments on “FAQ
  1. Thaddy de Koning says:

    It seems accept-lists and block-lists or white lists and blacklists need a companion. In such an approach there is an implied don’t-know-list or gray list. Due to the dynamics of the web, this implied gray-list is unlikely to vanish over time.
    Because of this, policy should be in place to handle the gray-list in a consistent and accepted manner.
    In the current proposal I find this important aspect is currently largely missing or at least underdeveloped.

    In a technical sense the proposals are state-full. I would suggest to define initial state – the gray-list – from which to populate accept-lists and block-lists. I would also suggest to define default handlers for such a state. In a logical sense the state transition to accept or block are only two operations that may be validly performed on the initial state.
    I foresee some real problems for the Advisory Board in defining this:
    e.g:
    Given the goals of the proposals the initial state should probably indicate blocking to at least certain level to be decided. Given that the fifth element (W3C on do-not-track) is not yet fully defined I fear there would be either double work or a premature definition.
    In my opinion, the do-not-track filtering is probably the only mechanism that can perform a default filter on the gray-list with any kind of authority and is therefore essential to the proposal.
    The presence or absence of the do-not-track indicator seems to be the only mechanism to perform default filtering with any kind of authority and this is not yet fully defined. The accept-list and block-list are in my opinion logically just derivatives of initial state. The default filter logically comes before them.
    With this point I hope to demonstrate that there is a very high risk that the proposals are subject to the same frantic politics and debate as is the case with the do-not-track proposal in the first place. And that defeats at this moment in time the goals f the cookie clearing house.

  2. Glenn N Davis says:

    Please work with SRware the makers of IRON Browser. They are interested in patching the gaping holes in the google chromium browser. I might tell them myself but my Deutsch is none too good. Perhaps you have someone who reads and speaks German might be able to properly invite these security oriented folk to the table. Other people I would love to see include The Calomel.org folk and the Enigmail folk.

    Regards: GND

  3. Glenn N Davis says:

    It is essential that Americans be FREE to not have their Digital EFFECTS Appropiated without a court order on a piecemeal basis. Blanket orders remind me of Ben Franklin’s advocating “Those who would sacrifice freedom for temporary safety DESERVE NEITHER [Freedom nor Safety].” [Bolding mine.]

    What would it take to set up the browser to eliminate the likes of NSA from knowing much from their spying on their fellow Americans. Please invite the People like EFF.org to the table as well.

    Finally, Please also include in Firefox a button that provides encryption with a push of that button. Apparently a free society requires transparancy in Government and Extremely Strong ENCRYPTION for every day communications.

    Thanks, In advance.
    GND

4 Pings/Trackbacks for "FAQ"
  1. [...] hope to complete Phase I in a few months, by Fall 2013,” said the CHH website in a short FAQ published Wednesday. Phase I will involve decision-making on several fronts, including technical [...]

  2. [...] hope to complete Phase I in a few months, by Fall 2013,” said the CHH website in a short FAQ published Wednesday. Phase I will involve decision-making on several fronts, including technical [...]

  3. [...] hope to complete Phase I in a few months, by Fall 2013,” said the CHH website in a short FAQ published Wednesday. Phase I will involve decision-making on several fronts, including technical [...]

  4. [...] hope to complete Phase I in a few months, by Fall 2013,” said the CHH website in a short FAQ published Wednesday. Phase I will involve decision-making on several fronts, including technical [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>