on unifying site behavior and consent

Lets face it, the users of your ShinyNewWebSite(beta) will never know exactly how it works. Perhaps that's by design (look, it's magic!), perhaps that's simply because they're not computer programmers, but this is the reality.

So there's this problem: how do I get users to provide informed consent to use my shiny new data collection web site? I want to do some really cool stuff, but I want the users of the site to know what's happening and feel in control.

This is hard. I think there's a ton of value in data mining and personalization, and it's not reasonable to expect users to comprehend the entire process of how their data is collected and used. We do however need to empower users to manage trust for the organizations who collect and use their data, and one way to do this is to get them closer to understanding what happens.

Here's one way I've been thinking about this: on one end of a spectrum are the users; they have values and want to assert protection over some of their data. On the other end of the spectrum are the web sites; they produce value from the users' data and want to be honest and compliant with users' desires. Right now there's often a huge gap between what users want and what sites actually do with their data. We need to shrink this gap.

I've talked about this gap from a user's perspective before (the privacy perception gap) and ultimately this gap leads to shock and discomfort. In Firefox 4, we deployed DNT as one feature to help shrink the gap from the user's informed-consent side.

Anything we can do to help make obvious users' preferences and privacy choices shrinks the gap from the user side, but we should work from the site's side as well, and hope the efforts meet somewhere in the middle. What else can we do to help bring site behavior into to the user's mental model of what's going on?

We need something new to improve upon privacy policies. We need something more objective than self-explanation. We need something empirical that can be measured, digested and shown to users. We need technology that makes it easier for people to peer into the opaque bits of the web and see what data is collected and how it's used. While it's not realistic to expect a silver bullet that makes all users instantly understand how sites work, we should still try hard; let's throw all the ideas that we have out on the table and approach this gap with as many tools as we have to try and shrink it.

Clearing Flash cookies using Firefox

Back in March, we shipped Firefox 4 with a feature that sends a signal to plugins like Flash and Silverlight when you clear your cookies. Adobe has announced that starting with Flash Player version 10.3, they'll be listening to the signal! This is exciting, because clearing your flash cookies is as easy as clearing regular cookies in this latest version of flash.

Here's when Firefox 4 tells Flash Player version 10.3 to delete LSOs (Flash cookies):

• When you clear all your cookies in Firefox using "clear recent history" [how-to link]
• When you choose "forget about this site" in your library (history) window [how-to link]
• When you quit Firefox, if you have Firefox configured to clear your cookies automatically upon exit [how-to link]

Chrome and Internet Explorer are also supporting this behavior, so this is fantastic news for everyone's privacy on the web!

More reading for techies:

• The relevant Firefox bug
• The NPAPI specification
• Previous story about supporting Private Browsing mode

Do we Understand OBA and Tracking?

With all the discussion in the social and political spheres about online behavioral advertisements (OBA), there's an awful lot of heat underneath the two points of view about tracking.  On one side, people are firmly asserting that most folks don't want targeted ads, while on the other side the assertion is that targeted ads are much much better (and less annoying) and people actually prefer them.

I think there's a bit of a gap in which assumptions are employed.  It's not clear how much the average consumer knows about targeted ads, and without knowing that, we can't assume anything about what they want. Furthermore, if we ask questions that assume unknowns, the results are useless -- asking for approval of targeted ads means two different things if the respondent does or does not understand that the ad network has to profile them to accomplish this.

Collecting Data.
First of all, it's important to acknowledge that these ad networks are already accumulating a whole lot of information for a variety of purposes: click-through rates, ad placement effectiveness, ROI, etc.  They just don't directly tell consumers about this.  In fact, many networks have been tracking individuals from ad impression all the way through purchase (conversion tracking) as yet another metric of successful advertising -- and for those of you who buy ads, you understand how powerful this knowledge is.  These already existing uses of data are incredibly helpful for advertisers (and the networks too, for ad placement), but it's not clear if consumers realize this is happening.

Online behavioral advertising is probably just a new use for already collected data.  The data's already warehoused, and it would take an awful lot of arm-twisting to reduce what ad networks collect -- because it's used for more than just OBA.

So I think the set of questions we ask consumers should be changed from "do you want targeted ads?" to the more precise pair of queries: "is it acceptable for ad networks to build a profile on you?" and "may ad networks use this profile to customize ads you see?"  We don't yet understand if people want this data collected, moreover want it used for OBA.  This distinction is necessary, because I think there are three groups of people here:

1. people who don't want a profile built or their browsing habits recorded at all.
2. people who accept conversion tracking but want to see the same ads as everyone else.
3. people who accept tracking and want the profile created to be used for displaying targeted ads.

My hunch is that group 2 is smaller than 1 and 3, but I haven't seen a survey measure precisely this.

Measuring Desire.
Gallup has taken a step to gather preliminary information about consumer preference; unfortunately, it only seems to address the vague question "is it okay if ad networks show you custom ads?"  I'd really like to see a series of questions that measure habit-tracking approval as well as approval for use of tracking in OBA.  Once we know this, we can figure out if people need a tool to opt-out of data collection, or if a tool to control data use is enough.

My personal point of view (not that of my employer or anyone else) is that OBA is not an invasion of privacy -- the stealth collection of data about my preferences is the invasion.  Perhaps it's worth the convenience like cell phones or ez-pass toll devices, or perhaps it's not.  Whether or not this invasion of privacy is acceptable should be ultimately up to you.  As with many things, you can trade bits of privacy for something new.  Would you like to "buy" better ads with your browsing history?

privacy-preserving videos

It's hard to resist the YouTube hotness -- especially if you feel like blogging about the adorable kittens you just saw on YouTube because all your friends must absolutely see it. Sarcasm aside, there are plenty of reasons to embed videos on a blog or web site, but there's something to consider: the embedded video might be used to track your visitors!

Frankly, any content embedded on your site but hosted by another site can cause privacy concerns. When the content is requested, the user's cookies go along with it. The effect is that not only does YouTube know what site a user is on when viewing the kitten video, but they potentially also know who the viewer is! This means that unless you log out of YouTube regularly, they know all the videos you've viewed and on what sites you saw them.

This isn't breaking news. This stuff has been around for a while, it's just Not Obvious.

So you run a blog or web site and you don't want to aid in YouTube tracking your visitors. What do you do? You have three options in my view:

1. Use YouTube's privacy mode. You can embed videos that suppress sending cookies until the visitor has clicked to watch them. This works by changing URLs for any content automatically loaded by your site from the domain "youtube.com" to "youtube-nocookie.com". This way the cookies (for youtube.com) aren't sent until more content is loaded from youtube.com after the click.

2. Don't trust 'em? Use EFF's MyTube. This does something similar, but the static content is loaded from your own site, then when the visitor clicks on the video, it is loaded from youtube.com and the cookies are sent.

3. Open Video FTW! If possible, host the video yourself (on your own website) and use the <video> tag! More info here. Flash is not the only way to display video on the web! Use open standards!