Source URL: https://brave.com/blog/related-website-sets/
Source: Hacker News
Title: Chrome Is Entrenching Third-Party Cookies That Will Mislead Users
Feedly Summary: Comments
AI Summary and Description: Yes
Summary: The text critiques Google’s Related Website Sets (RWS) feature and explains its potential privacy harms, especially in a post-third-party cookie web. Research indicates that users cannot accurately determine if two websites are related, leading to unintended tracking and privacy invasions, opposing the intentions of increasing privacy on the web.
Detailed Description:
The critique on Google’s RWS feature highlights significant privacy concerns following the impending elimination of third-party cookies. Key points of the analysis are as follows:
* **Privacy Risks**: The RWS feature could reverse the privacy advantages gained from the deprecation of third-party cookies. Google claims RWS provides user benefits by maintaining compatibility among related sites, yet this is contested by the findings of the study.
* **User Misunderstanding**: A critical finding from the research is that web users struggle to accurately identify relationships between websites, resulting in a large proportion of incorrect assumptions about site affiliations. The study shows that:
* Approximately 73% of participants made at least one incorrect determination regarding whether two sites were related.
* Around 42% of all responses indicated users believed sites were unrelated when they were confirmed as related under RWS.
* **Underlying Assumptions of RWS**: RWS is predicated on the idea that if two sites are owned by the same entity, tracking is permissible. This could lead to serious privacy violations, as even knowledgeable users may mistakenly believe their data is secure.
* **Criticism of Google’s Justifications**: Google suggests that RWS benefits users by facilitating seamless browsing experiences. However, the study undermines these claims and points out that alternative browsers maintain robust privacy standards without relying on such compromises.
* **Concerns Over Trust and Ownership**: There is an alarming lack of security around domain ownership. Just because a site is related today does not ensure it will be tomorrow, raising questions about long-term trust in domain associations.
* **Impact on Non-English Speakers**: The study’s findings suggest that users in non-English speaking regions may face even greater difficulties understanding site associations, further exacerbating privacy risks.
* **Broader Implications for Browsers**: Unlike Chrome, alternative browsers (e.g., Brave, Firefox, Safari) aim to prevent all forms of cross-site tracking, ensuring user privacy even across associated sites. The existence of RWS goes against this trend and realigns browser incentives toward advertisers.
* **Overall Conclusion**: RWS is viewed not as a mechanism to enhance user privacy but as a tool facilitating greater tracking under the guise of user benefit. The broader web community, including multiple leading browsers, has largely rejected this proposal, recognizing the inherent risks posed to user privacy and advocating for stronger privacy measures.
In summary, this analysis reveals substantial privacy implications for users, particularly in a landscape transitioning away from third-party cookies. The text serves as a cautionary tale regarding the viability of new web features that may inadvertently reintroduce prior privacy harms, ultimately urging the development community to prioritize user privacy over advertising interests.