Risk
2/22/2011
12:54 PM
50%
50%

FTC Internet Privacy Proposal Slammed By Ad Industry

“Do Not Track” settings planned by the Federal Trade Commission may not go far enough according the Center for Digital Democracy and U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

Google Chrome 9 Advances The 3D Graphical Web
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: Google Chrome 9 Advances The 3D Graphical Web

Will the future see a "Do Not Track" setting in browsers that prevents data brokers and Web sites from tracking a consumer's every click?

In December, the Federal Trade Commission made that recommendation when it released "Protecting consumer privacy in an era of rapid change: A proposed framework for businesses and policymakers." In the proposal, released for public comment, the FTC said that the previous approach, in which industry groups could self-regulate by setting and disclosing their own privacy policies, had failed.

"Current privacy policies force consumers to bear too much burden in protecting their privacy," said the FTC. Furthermore, it warned that more advanced technologies were enabling "rapid data collection and sharing that is often invisible to consumers."

Industry groups, however, have slammed the FTC's proposal, suggesting it would wreck the ability of Web sites to provide personalized content. "The Internet is comprised of millions of interconnected Web sites, networks and computers -- a literal ecosystem, all built upon the flow of different types of data," according to a statement released by the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB). "To create a Do Not Track program would require reengineering the Internet's architecture." Instead, it suggested a new self-regulated program for online behavioral advertising.

But consumer rights groups have been arguing differently. The Center for Digital Democracy and U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) on Friday released a statement recommending that the FTC require that all surveillance technologies in use be disclosed. It also wants people to be allowed to view and correct the data collected about them, in addition to a Do Not Track feature.

On Friday, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) released similar recommendations, including what it calls a "one-stop opt-out process" for consumers. According to the PRC, there are currently at least 133 data brokers in the United States, all of which have different procedures -- or offer no option -- for consumers to opt out. Some organizations also put hurdles in place, such as requiring consumers to mail a copy of their driver's license together with any opt-out request, while others have levied a fee.

Legislation would be a crucial component of any Do Not Track feature, since the FTC can't create laws, but only advise Congress. Earlier this month, however, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) introduced a bill that would require the FTC to develop Do Not Track standards, and give it the power to enforce companies' compliance with those regulations.

What would a Do Not Track approach look like to consumers? The three major browser developers are creating their own strategies: Mozilla Firefox 4 uses a Do Not Track header that gets transmitted to any Web site visited. Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 allows for user-created Tracking Protections Lists that forcibly block tracking via the browser. Google Chrome, meanwhile, provides a "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension that alerts any companies that are members of the National Advertising Initiative to not track that user.

PRC endorsed the Firefox approach to "do not track," citing its "simplicity for the user as well as being universal and persistent," and noted that together with legislation, it would be the toughest approach for data brokers to circumvent.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-5084
Published: 2015-08-02
The Siemens SIMATIC WinCC Sm@rtClient and Sm@rtClient Lite applications before 01.00.01.00 for Android do not properly store passwords, which allows physically approximate attackers to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-5352
Published: 2015-08-02
The x11_open_helper function in channels.c in ssh in OpenSSH before 6.9, when ForwardX11Trusted mode is not used, lacks a check of the refusal deadline for X connections, which makes it easier for remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions via a connection outside of the permitted time ...

CVE-2015-5537
Published: 2015-08-02
The SSL layer of the HTTPS service in Siemens RuggedCom ROS before 4.2.0 and ROX II does not properly implement CBC padding, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain cleartext data via a padding-oracle attack, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-3566.

CVE-2015-5600
Published: 2015-08-02
The kbdint_next_device function in auth2-chall.c in sshd in OpenSSH through 6.9 does not properly restrict the processing of keyboard-interactive devices within a single connection, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct brute-force attacks or cause a denial of service (CPU consumptio...

CVE-2015-1009
Published: 2015-07-31
Schneider Electric InduSoft Web Studio before 7.1.3.5 Patch 5 and Wonderware InTouch Machine Edition through 7.1 SP3 Patch 4 use cleartext for project-window password storage, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information by reading a file.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
What’s the future of the venerable firewall? We’ve invited two security industry leaders to make their case: Join us and bring your questions and opinions!