I never consent to give my data away or being tracked, but how do you deal with so called legitimate interest? I tried several times to untick them but it is a long list (in fact at the bottom there is a “vendors” link with even longer, much longer list. It took me 10 minutes to get to the bottom of it once).
My questions: -how can we trust these so called legitimate interests when they are self defined by companies whose business model relies on your data? -how can we find out what these legitimate interests are and what data it collects? -are such companies controlled in any way? -is this kind of consent form compliant with EU gdpr? (normally opt out is to be as easy as opt in, and there is no “refuse all” for these so called legitimate interests. -what are your strategies against such sites tracking you? Or am I just being paranoid?
The sheer amount vendors is daunting, the Internet really turned into crap
Do not question, just obey.
I thought legitimate interest meant you were legitimately interested in giving up your data to those vendors???
Nope.
And now hand me over your wallet. You can’t deny it, I have legitimate interest.
Your browser can block cookies.
Your browser cannot block server-side abuse of your personal data. These consent forms are not about cookies; they’re about fooling users into consenting to abuse of their personal data. Cookies are just one of many many technological measures required to carry out said human rights abuse.
Have https://noyb.eu/en or https://www.eff.org/ or others never covered this ? If not it would be good to get them interested ?
And the “we play nice” respons of IAB: https://iabeurope.eu/iab-europe-tcf-and-noybs-war-on-cookie-banners/
Thank you, these were two very interesting read on the gdpr law, spirit of the law and the complexity of enforcing it (and how those data-thirsty suckers always find a way to carry on their wrongdoingds)
Legitimate interest is a way for the vendors to not need your confirmation. In general, your right to privacy is valued against the vendor’s right to operate. The most often used example is advertisement: in general, vendors are allowed to advertise, as they want to operate and sell their products. But you have a right to your data (e.g. mail adress, home adress, interests…). So courts have to value what is more important. Another example that most people would agree is that clubs want to show what happens in the club, so they publish pictures from their activities (interest of club to show they are active vs personal right to your image). As not every case goes to court, most vendors see their interest as more important and interpret “legitimate” interest rather loosely. So in general, the idea of legitimate interest is compliant with the GDPR, although I believe most sites use it too liberal.
They’re legitimately interested in your data.
Legitimate interest is just bullshit.
Can I have your:
- wallet
- emails received
- telephone number
- pin code
- visa card numbers
- browser history
- home address
- dates you won’t be home
- alarm code
I too am legitimately interested in this data.
Hey, these faceless corporations deserve your info. /s
Why are you asking for their consent? You’re using his personal data on the basis of your legitimate interest.
Use a script obfuscator. I’ve been using one for about a decade now and it’s extremely easy to tell when companies are doing illegal spying. Looking at YOU ebay. My full name is not GKDSLGFJDS ZKGWKDSF, you fucking assholes. Enjoy the cement shoes when the advertisers you sold to find out that information is nothing but strings of randomly long random characters.
If it won’t let me untick all but the essential cookies easily - close tab, move on.
Recently I realised that some “reject all” options still don’t reject the “legitimate” bullshit, so I now avoid those sites too (and no, I don’t trust that extensions that claim to reject all for me will actually reject all).
I’ve got better things to do with my time than scrutinise these cookie pop ups and/or go through lengthy lists individually unticking options. Fuck that noise - don’t have minimal respect for users? Then I’m definitely not providing you any of my data (the sites that make it the hardest rarely hold information you can’t easily find elsewhere)…
This is the exception to prove the rule that the other interests are definitely illegitimate. This is the website telling you that they give away your data for illegitimate purposes.
It’s not a surprise. We knew this was true. But seeing it’s spelled out like this is a little galling.
Illegitimate: not authorized by the law; not in accordance with accepted standards or rules
The website is basically admitting that they’re using your data maliciously, intentionally, by having this distinction.
While you’re right conceptually, this isn’t what the wording means in terms of consent dialogs. Legitimate interest means they can assume, legitimately, that you have an interest in aspects of the site (by you being there) that require X cookies, basically. Ie their product is providing functionality they can assume you’re interested in just by being there, and they’re “pre approving” the tracking/storage for that functionality.
I concur that it’s rubbish and used almost always in a manner that reeks of illegitimacy.
There’s no such thing as legitimate interest. Reject what you can, block everything else with adblockers.
You can just use uBlock Origin with this list to hide the cookie notices: https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/abp/
Won’t help with websites that (illegally) have cookies enabled by default.
You can (and probably should) configure Firefox to automatically block all 3rd party cookies
What about first party cookies?
Multi-Account Containers to separate your tabs. Then wipe all cookies on closing.
OP:
posts about tracking and not consenting to give data away
also OP:
uses Google Chrome
Bromite and Cromite are a thing too
I used cromite for a while, and in general prefer it to Mulch, but I stick to it for the webview. (only way that seems to have the webview replace Google’s is to define Mulch as default browser). I still often use cromite too
Yes I use Mull but this does not look like a Firefox-based browser
Mull is a firefox-based browser developed by DivestOS, Mulch is developed by the same team but it’s based on Chromium
Bromite? Not anymore. Cromite? Absolutely.
Wrong, that’s Mulch. Uninstalling and deactivating Google apps is the first thing I do. Android system webview is the tricky one, but Mulch has a webview too. Still the default one manages to creep in sometimes, and deactivating it breaks things that call it specifically
Mulch ain’t the worst, but there are better options. Generally, I would recommend a Firefox-based browser instead of Chromium, because it has full extension support (including adblockers). You can check out this comparison chart, or this one.
IANAL, but if you’re in the eu, iirc legitimate interest is not legal basis for data processing but they may still store it for later use if you ever agree to one of these
I am like 90% sure they use it regardless.
When the government takes your data they will call it legitimate
They will call it legal and we will like it.
