Chronotope’s avatarChronotope’s Twitter Archive—№ 140,356

            1. The entire GDPR approach set up by the IAB EU--including TCF, the standard UX, and the bidstram flow of data alongside the consent signal--is on the verge of being declared illegal: iccl.ie/news/online-consent-pop-ups-used-by-google-and-other-tech-firms-declared-illegal/
              OpenGraph image for iccl.ie/news/online-consent-pop-ups-used-by-google-and-other-tech-firms-declared-illegal/
          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
            There are two major challenges to the status quo that would break current and future approaches of both the challenge banner and the consent API system:
        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
          1. that the 'here's all the vendors, here's the ability to consent to each of them, here's many options' UX that the TCF process has made a standard interface across websites would make the provider and the IAB itself a data controller...
      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
        This UX would be considered blocking access and would, if the final decision matches what we see here, therefore not be considered legal GDPR compliance.
    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
      2. This means (as I understand it) that the IAB and the CMP provider would both be liable for preventing the transmission of user data...
  1. …in reply to @Chronotope
    Right now, the TCF system sends the consent string as a ride-along piece of data with all the user data that normally is involved in an ad call. A common misunderstanding of TCF is that your choices block data transmission. That isn't the case...
    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
      Most implementations of TCF are a signal that rides along in the bidstream & says 'pretty please ignore any attached user data'. Middlemen in ad tech are known to practice 'consent fraud' which alters or removes this "daisybit" data & lets them sell the traffic at higher rates...
      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
        But if the CMPs and the IAB EU are reinterpreted as data controllers they are--in theory--given the additional responsibility of "the purposes and means of the processing of personal data" which would make them responsible for consent fraud and user data transmission...
        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
          The big change that could occur here is that any system might have to--in order to comply with GDPR--actually control the data transmission at the top... and every other... level. This is a big change b/c it means sites have to change their behavior significantly w/consent states
          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
            I'm not a lawyer, but I do think that any way it goes the challenge to the existence of TCF and the supporting UX is going to mean a major industry-wide change to how things work in the EEA-corner of the web.
            1. …in reply to @Chronotope


Search tweets' text