"Cookienoia" and Other "Security Concerns" About Web Browsing Seem Overstated
There was a big scary story in the San Jose Mercury News this morning headlined, in something larger than 72-point type, "Virtual voyeurism." It provided a Big Scare Tactic warning readers that, as the lead paragraph said, "Big Brother and his buddies are watching what you do online."
Most of it was rehash. Warnings about cookies (almost none of which is practical or real), a pointer to an anonymous browser masking tool. But one of the warnings caught my eye. Here's the operative paragraph:
"When accessing Web sites, browsers typically reveal users' Internet addresses, which can be tied to particular geographic locations or workplaces. They also often divulge other information about users, sometimes including their name and email address." I thought to myself, "Really? I wonder how that could happen?"
The article pointed to a Danish site that can help you determine your browser's vulnerabilities. So I went there on my OS X system with both Safari and Firefox 2.x. I was amused to find that a significant number of potentially worrisome-sounding characteristics it could test for your browser applied only to Microsoft Internet Explorer on Windows. Color me unsurprised. Unfortunately, their ability to check mail safety has been temporarily disabled for some reason, so I couldn't see if my browser was violating any privacy principle. Somehow, I doubt it.
Cookienoia (a word I think I just coined) is really pretty silly for the most part. Cookies are deliberately small, deliberately tied only to the site from which they were issued, and in 90% of cases are really designed for your convenience. Without cookies, e.g,. you'd have to log in every time to your favorite sites, re-enter your membership information, re-visit message threads, be unable to find out what is new on a site since your last visit...a whole host of things that make the browser experience seamless. Can cookies be exploited by nefarious developers? Probably. But an intensive search on the Net reveals very little chatter on the topic and almost none since 2006. I think this is a leftover from people who hear one time that something is frightening and then go through the rest of their lives believing it.
