When cookies are set to "Block Always" it often doesn't work. Websites like bet368 that appear as popups can get through that setting seemingly very easily. Why hasn't Apple addressed this? It's been this way for Safari for over 6 months now. Surely always should mean always.
Safari Security Problem.
Not to be argumentative but realistic: If other companies are circumventing Safari user cookie settings the same way Google did, then Apple hasn't addressed it have they?
It’s not Apple’s to address. They’re doing it illegally. Apple doesn’t have to do anything.
Oh, that's different. I'll agree it's not Apple's responsibility, tho I don't think it's illegal for a company to ignore the setting preference.
"Do Not Track" is effectively a voluntary program for now, and offered in most browsers including Safari, Chrome, Firefox and IE.. There's smaller ad-placement and data-collection companies that have indicated they have no intention of following it. Yahoo says they too ignore the setting in IE, and at least one researcher who claims even Bing ignores it. They may have different arguments for why they're choosing to look past the "Do Not Track" preference but until it becomes law, or a least an FTC decree , it's not illegal to do so.
Edited by Gatorguy - 1/19/14 at 10:28am
Seeing as Apple has no control over the internet, it is fundamentally a security problem.
And besides, the issue Tallest is referring to is Google circumventing to setting "Block Cookies from Third Parties and Advertisers".
I am talking about something else. What I am referring to is nefarious people circumventing the setting "Block All Cookies", period. It's not the same setting. It's a security issue. Apple can and should make that setting block everything. It's not like the world will suddenly be filled with 7 billion saints to make that setting work. It's about Apple making it work. Blocking everything should mean everything.
I have Tallest blocked for a reason: he makes it hard to have a reasonable discussion on most any subject, but especially one that's in any way critical of his fruit-flavoured religion.
Edited by Ireland - 1/19/14 at 1:31pm
Or maybe if you took five seconds to think about it on your own, you’d probably ask yourself the question, “Since it hasn’t been done, Apple obviously has a reason for not doing it. Could it be because they CANNOT do it?”
I’m as upset about “no cookies doesn’t mean no cookies” as you, but your first response is “it’s Apple’s fault” when you know nothing.
The rest of what you’re saying is already patently false, so continue your delusions.