Review Request: GUI configuration for the 'Do Not Track' feature...

Dawit A adawit at
Fri Apr 15 19:57:03 BST 2011

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen <ossi at> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 09:24:47AM -0400, Dawit Alemayehu wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Maksim Orlovich <mo85 at> wrote:
>> > Ah, I misread the default. But still, I don't think we want to send
>> > DNT:0 if the user unchecks the checkbox, given how the label is worded
>> > -- IMHO we wouldn't want to send the header at all.
>> That makes no sense especially since not sending the header is
>> currently equivalent to DNT: 1.
> huh?

ahhh... huh ?

>> The configuration option is there to allow the user to opt-in if they
>> so choose.
> that's not a very wise default. if too many people will use it (*), the
> data miners will just ignore the standard, based on the rightful claim
> that most people didn't even explicitly say they don't want to be
> tracked. if you want to encourage people to make use of this privacy
> protection mechanism, you should pop up a dialog if no preference has
> been configured yet.
> (*) not that konqueror would be in any way significant, but whatever...

Please note that this feature by design is entirely voluntary from the
sites prespective. They are under no obligation to honor the header in
the first place. What we are doing here is by default we send a header
"DNT:1" to tell sites that honor the specification not to track. The
user does not have to do anything! If on the other hand the user does
not mind being tracked, then they can uncheck, or if we change the
label of the checkbox, check the option to send "DNT:0".

That is exactly what firefox does. I do not know what is so confusing
about this. I would be the last person to turn on privacy invading
functionality by default!


Dawit A.

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list