Online bank accounts and cookies

MoneySaverLog

I've noticed that most of the banks are now displaying cookie policies, I'm sure this never used to be the case.

Has something changed to force them to do this?

Rupert_Bear

MoneySaverLog wrote: »

I've noticed that most of the banks are now displaying cookie policies, I'm sure this never used to be the case.

Has something changed to force them to do this?

Yep as from today all companys have to. Was mentioned on the BBC Today programme this am.

Gromitt

It the new anti tracking policy. To serve any cookie which tracks a user, you have to warn the user before hand.

So thats about 95% of websites...

PasturesNew

Any website that has visitors from the EU/UK has to warn those visitors that the site uses cookies and ask for their permission to continue. Even a US firm, if its traffic is from the EU/UK will have to do it.

Like all things it's a new law born of good intent, but now it's already had the deadline changed and it'll not be implemented by many sites as they don't know/didn't understand/didn't think it applied etc.

At the moment, very few websites are actually doing this. It's "easy" to do .... IF you know how. A lot of small companies/individuals, simply don't have the budget/know-how to even attempt it....

Overall ... it's going to be really !!!! as a website visitor from now on as more and more start to put it in place ... annoying notices and "OK" boxes to click all over the place.

Gromitt

Problem is, if you put up a message and ask the user, are you allowed to store that information in a cookie if the user clicks no? Are do you have to ask them again the next time they visit?

pmduk

The only organisation known to have not yet complied is our own dear Government.

Scarpacci

There's a great deal of confusion over which cookies require consent (let alone the whole issue of "implied consent". The Information Commissioner's Office has been decidedly vague over which cookies are strictly necessary. The likes of shopping carts, username/logins and, yes, remembering that somebody declined cookies should be fine.

Advertising is one area of concern, but at the same time they seemed to show some recognition that advertising is necessary for any site dependent on them for funding. They also had mixed messages about the likes of Google Analytics, which are essentially necessary for many webmasters.

It's interesting that lots of sites have responded with more information and more transparency about cookies, but haven't actually changed which cookies they set and the underlying "issue" of privacy. They're setting the same sort of cookies and not offering a way to change this. I don't know if that's good enough for the ICO or maybe it's what they really wanted, but it's interesting that privacy wise for many sites now complying with this law that little has changed.

Either way, the law is ill considered. I find it highly ironic the EU, which is determined to force through longer data-retention periods for our private e-mails, web history, etc. is bothered about cookies, a minuscule privacy problem in almost all cases. The cookie law might be a useful distraction (for the EU) from the real privacy problems we face (namely government).