[deugtniet]

It's pretty well known that cookie-walls are rife with anti-consumer patterns. Going to something like formula1.com requires me to click more than a 100 times to object to the 'legitimate interests' of as many companies. Which is a pretty terrible anti-pattern when I don't want to be tracked at all...

After reading the abstract, it seems the authors try to classify cookies using a special browser extension called "CookieBlock" [1]. I hope they are successful, because I hate being tracked on the internet.

[1]https://github.com/dibollinger/CookieBlock

[andai]

TrustArc's consent popup disappears instantly on Accept All but shows a loading spinner for "up to several minutes" if you reject cookies. I emailed them about this (because in my experience it's only their software that implements such a dark pattern), they replied "customer misconfigured our software, not our fault" lol.

[throwaway_sb666]

Honestly I think the GDPR/cookie consent providers should be held equally liable as the website owner for the collective violations facilitated by their product.

I think being able to go after the enablers and profiteers would make enforcement much easier.

An officially maintained list of legal/illegal libraries and services could help website owners to chose a known legal solution. Right now it's hard to expect website owners 'do the right thing' when there's so much contradictory information out there.

[Nextgrid]

I wonder if it's a really lazy and terrible attempt at accounting for how long the opt-out request would take. Let's imagine it has no way to know (because of cross-domain restrictions?) whether an opt-out request to a third-party succeeds - in which case it simply waits a reasonable amount of time for the request to complete. Of course, a reasonable time should be a handful of seconds, but I guess at least it makes sense that this is configurable and could explain the problem.

That's about the only non-malicious reason I can think of.

[mpweiher]

> It's pretty well known that cookie-walls are rife with anti-consumer patterns.

Which are all illegal.

The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.

And you can help: if you find an annoying pop up, file a complaint with your local data protection agency.

[zeruch]

I use UMatrix for this (and NoScript) for the granularity

[judge2020]

> Going to something like formula1.com r

Not sure if this is because i'm in the states, but 'manage settings' has a 'reject all' button for me[0] and it seems to work.

0: https://i.judge.sh/0vCJB/q_nQ34wtjO.png

[Thiez]

But does that button also reject "legitimate" interests?

[guitarbill]

Seems like perverting the meaning of "legitimate interest" is the ad industry's next move, now that the obviously illegal popups were officially decried as illegal.