Hmm-Signatures Setting Tracing Cookies

Boston

Originally posted by jank
??are u serious

Deadly serious bud... An italian bloke in a pub told me it one.

ecksor

Originally posted by Boston
On the whole, that isn't true.

...

Besides, (this may be a work of fiction) isn't the boards sever hosted in the middle of a telephone exchange or the equvalent in dublin city somewhere.

News to me.

Boston

Originally posted by ecksor
News to me.

in fairness I did say "this may be a work of fiction" might have been a give away.:rolleyes:

amp

Writing quite a lot of fiction lately Boston? Too bad it's not very good fiction.

Boston

Originally posted by amp
Writing quite a lot of fiction lately Boston? Too bad it's not very good fiction.

Hey, I know where you live.

mr_angry

Seems pretty simple to me. If you think a sig contains malware, report it. Otherwise, ignore it in whatever way you think suits you best.

Occidental

Originally posted by Boston
I ****ing knew it. I knew I had telephone exchange wrong, but its it hosted at a fibre node or something, one of those big sever parks by nevada or somebody? Maybe it was all a dream or a drunken conversation, I'm not sure anymore.

It’s a fibre cave under Stephen’s Green that Dev bought on the cheap when Batman went into receivership. The cable ladies are all a front for the sex/gambling den that finances boards, though it’ll all close down soon and reopen as a late night novelty Tesco’s. In truth Dev’s no better than Tony O’Reilly.

amp

Originally posted by Boston
Hey, I know where you live.

And that's relevant how?

Boston

Originally posted by Occidental
It’s a fibre cave under Stephen’s Green that Dev bought on the cheap when Batman went into receivership. The cable ladies are all a front for the sex/gambling den that finances boards, though it’ll all close down soon and reopen as a late night novelty Tesco’s. In truth Dev’s no better than Tony O’Reilly.

You see thats where your story goes wrong, Dev can't have bought anything as all his money goes on his crippling tree addiction.

amp

Originally posted by Boston
You see thats where your story goes wrong, Dev can't have bought anything as all his money goes on his crippling tree addiction.

Is there any point to this thread other than showcasing Bostons lack of any higher brain functions?

ecksor

No more off-topic posts.

jank

boston if your that parinoid why are you on the net in the first place

also u saying surfing a site in OZ will cost more than surfing a local site

ZENER

right I'll explain it to you, if you're in Ireland right you need to like put a prefix to get access to sites hosted in other countries right and this costs more because its long distance surfing as apposed to short distance sufting which is only like 1.27 cent a minute. Therefore if sigs are hosted on foreign sites they cost me more money and i don't like that and it takes longer to download due to the lag as a result of long distance surfing

He's kiddin' . . right ?

Zener dont be a moron, we dont serve the cookie, the image host does.

I liked it better when I didn't know who you were, then I could let fly at being called a moron.

ZENER

DeVore

I requested you NOT be one. That implies a capacity to not be one. That at least imparts hope neh?

Back on topic, I still havent seen a link to this Al Qaeda like threat to our security.

DeV.

ecksor

Originally posted by DeVore
Back on topic, I still havent seen a link to this Al Qaeda like threat to our security.

Depends upon what you mean by "our security". The threat is to users.

DeVore

I'm a user too.... (and a human, with feelings *sob*)

DeV.

mickeyboymel

Originally posted by DeVore
I requested you NOT be one. That implies a capacity to not be one. That at least imparts hope neh?

Back on topic, I still havent seen a link to this Al Qaeda like threat to our security.

DeV.

Jesus, I seem to have opened a right can of worms here. I was simply woundering where several cookies had come from relating to sites I never visit.

I Blocked all third party cookies and monitered what was being rejected and a few posts here threw up some .

I will link to two here for your benefit, but as I am on dialup, I do not intend to search for any more. I just thought people should be made fully aware of the fact that your site permits this practice .


EVERTON FOOTBALL CLUB
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=1559930#post1559930

CHINA ONLINE
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=894499#post894499

monument

There is a sig which show what mp3 the person is playing or something to that effect. I think it was the one I found which tracked cookies.

I don’t really care about it, but if you Admins think it's an issue I can report it next time I see it. Do you?

Anyway, maybe just to protect Boards' interests you could add, and possible enforce, a rule to only allow code which has a sole aim to displace images, or at least no code which directly or indirectly enables (non-Boards) cookies, or which tracks other personal information, just to comply with the Data Protection laws.

ecksor

Originally posted by monument
I don’t really care about it, but if you Admins think it's an issue I can report it next time I see it. Do you?

If you like. It's not breaking any specific rules, but no harm in knowing

Anyway, maybe just to protect Boards' interests you could add, and possible enforce, a rule to only allow code which has a sole aim to displace images, or at least no code which directly or indirectly enables (non-Boards) cookies, or which tracks other personal information, just to comply with the Data Protection laws.

Cookies and those images that display what ISP you're using make this stuff obvious, but any off-site image essentially does the same thing whether in a post or a signature.

I don't know if the data protection laws apply here. Boards' interests aren't in direct danger as far as I know ...

monument

Originally posted by ecksor
I don't know if the data protection laws apply here. Boards' interests aren't in direct danger as far as I know ...

I think they do, if you allow other people to obtain personal information with out letting users know about it first and/or without knowing how they keep the information (ie if they comply with the Data Protection laws on storage of such info).

Just to stressed - this is just if you want to be careful. That is if even if they apply.

ecksor

Originally posted by monument
I think they do, if you allow other people to obtain personal information with out letting users know about it first and/or without knowing how they keep the information (ie if they comply with the Data Protection laws on storage of such info).

We're not actually transmitting this information to third parties without consent though. What we are doing is facilitating other people who wish to grab the information and users may not realise that this is happening.

DeVore

It'll very quickly break a rule, right after I create a rule that says you dont do that sort of thing here. As ecksor says though, just a simple image can log your ip etc...

Mostly I'm not all *that* concerned about it but I wouldnt object to an option to turn all that sort of stuff off on the site for someone who IS concerned. I just dont want to tie ourselves up in knots trying to do the "right thing" when practically the entire internet infrastructure is against us...

DeV.

monument

Originally posted by DeVore
Mostly I'm not all *that* concerned about it but I wouldnt object to an option to turn all that sort of stuff off on the site for someone who IS concerned. I just dont want to tie ourselves up in knots trying to do the "right thing" when practically the entire internet infrastructure is against us...

Agreed.

I'm just pointing out an obvious need to cover your backs, even if all that is a rule and enforcement where obvious. Anyhow I’ve went on about this far more then I wanted to.

dogs

I, like most internet users I suspect, am quite aware of the lack of privacy I have online. The point I think ecksor's been trying to make is that boards.ie might be leaking information in ways it doesn't want to (I'm sure ecksor will correct me if I'm wrong).

For example, if I added a simple image to my signature and posted a few 'me too' posts to some of the busier threads on a handful of boards, say PI, GLB and After Hours. It would be possible (with a little work) to track a particular user accross those boards. Even without setting a cookie, it's still quite doable based on the IP. On dialup this probably isn't such a big problem but with more DSL users on IPs with much longer leases the difficulty in tracking a user and then determing who exactly that user is lessens. Wether it's by guessing based on when someone posted to a board or even from watching the IRC channel.

For most people this probably is a non-issue, if I'm posting to a public board I don't really care if someone else knows this. If I'm reading GLB, my username appears at the top of the forum index anyway. But if I log out to post to P.I. anonymously, my IP isn't going to change, I'm still 'trackable'.

I think why some people have a problem with this is that there are times when boards.ie seems to offer anonymity, to protect your identity so you can ask for advice about your recent animal fetish without publicly exposing (no, the other meaning) yourself.

Perhaps there is some middle ground, as was suggested in the other thread, protect the people who aren't aware they should enable any privacy options too. Allow images to be hosted on trusted sites only; boards, iol/eircom webspace, etc.

DeVore

As I've said, I'm all for enabling the minority who are concerned. But not at the expense of the ability to see images and link to them. You can kiss Pic-n-Mix, Arts and some fun Afterhours rolling game threads goodbye immediately for example.

I really cant see anyone being bothered to match IPs and cross reference them etc to find out that DeathGiver3000 is also IsMyWillyTooSmall on PI... its a possibility but not one that greatly concerns me.

DeV.

ZENER

Jesus, I seem to have opened a right can of worms here.

Nah don't worry about it . . he loves me really I give him something to do to keep his mind off snowboarding

ZENER

dogs

Originally posted by DeVore
As I've said, I'm all for enabling the minority who are concerned. But not at the expense of the ability to see images and link to them.

I dont think anyones suggesting that, just that perhaps images can only be hosted on trusted sites, ISP's, etc. Anyhoo.

I really cant see anyone being bothered to match IPs and cross reference them etc to find out that DeathGiver3000 is also IsMyWillyTooSmall on PI...

Gah! Now everyone knows. Thanks Dev. Thanks a lot.

ecksor

Originally posted by dogs
I dont think anyones suggesting that, just that perhaps images can only be hosted on trusted sites, ISP's, etc. Anyhoo.

That was one offered solution, but it wasn't accepted. If we ever let people configure whether or not to inline images in posts from foreign servers then we might whitelist a few like you mention.

ecksor

Cripes Bard, STFU.

Boston

Originally posted by ecksor
Cripes Bard, STFU.

:dunno: