Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

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
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 10/23/2020
Modern Day Insider Threat: Network Bugs That Are Stealing Your Data
David Pearson, Principal Threat Researcher,  10/21/2020
Are You One COVID-19 Test Away From a Cybersecurity Disaster?
Alan Brill, Senior Managing Director, Cyber Risk Practice, Kroll,  10/21/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-21269
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-27
checkpath in OpenRC through 0.42.1 might allow local users to take ownership of arbitrary files because a non-terminal path component can be a symlink.
CVE-2020-27743
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
libtac in pam_tacplus through 1.5.1 lacks a check for a failure of RAND_bytes()/RAND_pseudo_bytes(). This could lead to use of a non-random/predictable session_id.
CVE-2020-1915
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
An out-of-bounds read in the JavaScript Interpreter in Facebook Hermes prior to commit 8cb935cd3b2321c46aa6b7ed8454d95c75a7fca0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service attack or possible further memory corruption via crafted JavaScript. Note that this is only exploitable if the application usi...
CVE-2020-26878
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
Ruckus through 1.5.1.0.21 is affected by remote command injection. An authenticated user can submit a query to the API (/service/v1/createUser endpoint), injecting arbitrary commands that will be executed as root user via web.py.
CVE-2020-26879
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
Ruckus vRioT through 1.5.1.0.21 has an API backdoor that is hardcoded into validate_token.py. An unauthenticated attacker can interact with the service API by using a backdoor value as the Authorization header.