Re: Insertion of adverisements (was: Re: Draft finding - "Transitioning the Web to HTTPS")
Daniel Appelquist <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.w3c.tag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On 2 Feb 2015, at 16:51, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Daniel Appelquist <[email protected]> wrote: >> https://github.com/w3ctag/wiki/wiki/HTTPS-and-Advertising > > Noah was talking about the legitimacy of e.g. Comcast or Verizon > inserting advertisements and/or tracking identifiers into non-TLS > traffic. Not about the difficulty of getting ad networks to support > TLS. > > (I personally think that irrespective of whether it is legitimate, > it's another good reason to move to TLS. Technically impossible beats > theoretically forbidden.) > Right. I’m with you. To be clear: I wasn’t talking about tracking identifiers inserted into http headers, which I view as an abomination. I had actually been meaning to start the other conversation - the conversation about third party content in the ad space (which seems larger and more important for the web generally) - anyway, so I’m afraid I hijacked your email, Noah, to do so. My comments still stand - https and advertising seem like conflicting requirements to many and I want to bottom that out. Dan
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 455 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUz7U7AAoJEKrgifdQB5UFSGoIAJFZ3zQ1GqHFEmhX/PjhhR+y AWp9jgXeYqvJpJsYpOsPcjI3UeR1j6DecRfJgbLLVra6w1aK8ksicUnZ2CyOQ/T6 GCEs4dm6JqCUBw+cxJE2BTAbaGe+YGiH6Pn9uG0AKCF+aDKj4ZEU3UNCkHfw7lSB THiBqUs95lhZ13sO+bHJ1Y6JAG0GheMAGcYHnLfmq1vYN55Mc1crd4mcFqc8RGxV SiJ6BM7+HXYQENUst/vfh2dVqeTV50z8LGiJuFg67erzmV7MDXGj2fag82EUrwow l4I3BXBTkwjhsWHCxQ/NbVjqTzBl3Aqb5pu8E80QDwUKayXwujdERefmljKIayY= =Ed7f -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----