On 25/05/12 19:07, Tim Brocklehurst wrote:
> Apparently it's a slow news day at the Beeb. There are plenty of cookie
> controls in the browser itself, and "everyone" accepts the use of cookies. So
> no, I haven't changed my sites. I expect users to exercise their intellect and
> turn off cookie support if they don't like it.
Ah, but to quote the ICO guidance:
"At present, most browser settings are not sophisticated enough for
websites to assume that consent has been given to allow the site to set
a cookie. For consent to be clearly signified by the browser settings it
would need to be clear that subscribers had been prompted to consider
their current browser settings and, had either indicated in some way
they were happy with the default, or have made the decision to change
the settings.
Browser settings are part of the solution and you will increasingly be
able to rely on these as part of the mechanism for satisfying yourself
that you have a users consent to set cookies. [but] for now, you will
need to work on implementing another solution."
You need to explicitly tell users what cookies you set, what they are
used for and allow them to opt out of having them set. I've seen a
number of companies and organisations changing their website to reflect
these requirements too. Relying on users to exercise their intellect is
not enough it seems....
--
Please post to: Hampshire@???
Web Interface:
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
LUG URL:
http://www.hantslug.org.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
