New EU laws change cookie permissions, protects users

From May 25 European law, due to the e-Privacy directive, will force change in the UK meaning consent must be granted from websites before they store cookies on a users computer. The only exception to this rule will be cookies that are used on stores and for shopping baskets.

On the Web Store of the popular web browser, Chrome, there is already an extension to manage cookie permissions. Mozilla say they will use a different approach by utilising a Do-Not-Track HTTP header and Microsoft will use InPrivate Filtering protection against tracking with their IE9.

Although the plans were set out over 18 months ago, they are now coming into full force and business are trying to work out how to best seek a user's permission. The minister for Culture, Communications and the Creative Industries, Ed Vaizey, said in a statement the law would "cause uncertainty for businesses and consumers", "...we do not expect the Information Commissioner's Office to take enforcement action in the short term against businesses and organisations as they work out how to address their use of cookies," he added.

Although the rules are still being worked out and may take another few months until they completed, Information Commissioner Christopher Graham said "My message is that this is not your 'get out of jail free' card," talking specifically to businesses meaning they have some time to make the changes needed, but not forever.

Restrictions of this nature are bound to have a large impact on the way people use websites with an increase in login times, settings and possibly more pop-ups or nags requesting permission to store a cookie. All users should see the benefits, such as less cookie-based targeted advertising and more freedom over how their information is stored.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Warner Bros. to rent Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" on Facebook

Next Story

Google releases Chrome 10

29 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

really dont get why people get so fussed about this. This is just to get a foothold people.Not meant to be enforced actually. As with most EU laws, they are made just so they HAVE a law when they need it.
i.e. to fight criminal activities and privacy issues.
And i dont get whats wrong with that, considering the internet is mainly used for criminal activities and datamining.

Shadowzz said,
And i dont get whats wrong with that, considering the internet is mainly used for criminal activities and datamining.

Are you actually being serious, or just dumb?

Shadowzz said,
And i dont get whats wrong with that, considering the internet is mainly used for criminal activities and datamining.
Let me guess, you think it's made of tubes as well?

I just briefly scanned through the article. It seems that they're proposing that cookies should be opt-in, preventing advertisers 'drive-by' cookies. Presumably, clicking the "login" or "remember me" buttons counts as opting-in.

TFA is from the daily mail though. I cba to find their original source, but it's quite likely that the details of the new EU directive have been misinterpreted or are just plain missing.

Like **** I give a toss, all my sites will still store cookies without permission.
Without cookies, even sessions don't work, this EU rubbish really needs to take a hike and leave people the hell alone already.

this comes 10 to 15 years late, as cookies were abused in times of IE5 and IE6, today there are way more advanced and sofisticated ways for datamining ...
welcome to EU where 10y ago means today

Dwarden said,
this comes 10 to 15 years late, as cookies were abused in times of IE5 and IE6, today there are way more advanced and sofisticated ways for datamining ...
welcome to EU where 10y ago means today

In soviet EU you datamine the businesses

I just noticed that the same author posted the article about the latest edition of Chrome. So this makes it a little obvious to me that this author is promoting their own views my mentioning an irrevelant quote regarding Chrome in this article rather than just the news about this e-Privacy Directive.
This takes a lot of the credibility away from NeoWin's articles. Time to get better authors.

Not at all, I don't use Chrome. I am a firefox user.

I thought it could be put in there as its relavent to the article in that its to do with permissions of cookies. See the link in the sentence for info.

PHausjell said,
We don't ask for any of this, why do the EU keep adding on more and more laws and regulations?
Because the EU is the New World Order. Pretty soon we'll all be ruled by one government including those of us on the other side of the pond. It's only a matter of time...

Are we going back to the days of the early IE browsers, where by default every cookie triggers a prompt? (but not as annoying)

Denis W said,
Are we going back to the days of the early IE browsers, where by default every cookie triggers a prompt? (but not as annoying)
I have my FF set to prompt me each time a website I've not been to before wants to send cookies, block 45%, session only 45% and fully allow about 10%, usually being the login-session ones.
I also do a similar thing for JavaScript using NoScript, where I allow for session sites that I'm just passing through/very rarely visit if they need a script, permit sites that I use all the time and want script functionality and leave the rest blocked.
Furthermore, use AdblockPlus and my hosts file to blacklist loads of other things.

I can't think of anyone else I know that does so much black/whitelisting for their home surfing. I must be paranoid xD That said, I basically never encounter things I don't want online because of it. Don't even see ads in some other software because of how I edit my hosts file, and this makes me happier with my internet experience.

shhac said,
I have my FF set to prompt me each time a website I've not been to before wants to send cookies, block 45%, session only 45% and fully allow about 10%, usually being the login-session ones.
I also do a similar thing for JavaScript using NoScript, where I allow for session sites that I'm just passing through/very rarely visit if they need a script, permit sites that I use all the time and want script functionality and leave the rest blocked.
Furthermore, use AdblockPlus and my hosts file to blacklist loads of other things.

I can't think of anyone else I know that does so much black/whitelisting for their home surfing. I must be paranoid xD That said, I basically never encounter things I don't want online because of it. Don't even see ads in some other software because of how I edit my hosts file, and this makes me happier with my internet experience.

amen!

shhac said,
I have my FF set to prompt me each time a website I've not been to before wants to send cookies, block 45%, session only 45% and fully allow about 10%, usually being the login-session ones.
I also do a similar thing for JavaScript using NoScript, where I allow for session sites that I'm just passing through/very rarely visit if they need a script, permit sites that I use all the time and want script functionality and leave the rest blocked.
Furthermore, use AdblockPlus and my hosts file to blacklist loads of other things.

I can't think of anyone else I know that does so much black/whitelisting for their home surfing. I must be paranoid xD That said, I basically never encounter things I don't want online because of it. Don't even see ads in some other software because of how I edit my hosts file, and this makes me happier with my internet experience.


should try peerblock my man. allot easier to keep out data from certain IP's.

On this note it is Google we have to blame for this new e-Privacy directive anyway, because they do the most tracking of users on the internet for their own Ad related research and targeting. And if you use gMail, youtube and location aware google apps, google knows just about everything about you. Guess what guys. Big Brother is already here...

Ryoken said,
And it won't have any effect, Google will just track you by IP now + UserAgent now..

ip + user agent + ( site + date and time + duration )

Ryoken said,
And it won't have any effect, Google will just track you by IP now + UserAgent now..

Hmm, kinda worthless on an IP that has multiple users.

Why not just require browsers to offer a feature to not store cookies unless asked.. Being asked every time every site wants to put a cookie on your computer is just retarded..

Quit trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator by treating everyone like kids and require some personal responsibility.

Ryoken said,
Why not just require browsers to offer a feature to not store cookies unless asked.. Being asked every time every site wants to put a cookie on your computer is just retarded..

Quit trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator by treating everyone like kids and require some personal responsibility.

AAAAAMEN!

GS:ios

Ryoken said,
Why not just require browsers to offer a feature to not store cookies unless asked.. Being asked every time every site wants to put a cookie on your computer is just retarded..

Quit trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator by treating everyone like kids and require some personal responsibility.

Well you've been doing that with Windows OS your whole life. With retarded error messages, that makes you seem like that you're a retard

Ryoken said,
Why not just require browsers to offer a feature to not store cookies unless asked.. Being asked every time every site wants to put a cookie on your computer is just retarded..

Quit trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator by treating everyone like kids and require some personal responsibility.

almost every dynamic site that relies on session, use cookies :that's it over 90% of the dynamic sites of the net.

Magallanes said,

almost every dynamic site that relies on session, use cookies :that's it over 90% of the dynamic sites of the net.


most cookies are google's tracking your every move.
Plus this is just a way to get rid of those tracker cookies and what not, same as the AntiSpam laws etc. its just to get a foothold in internet spam.
So much crap is on the internet, not even funny ;/
hopefully these kind of laws push the last stuff to .ru domains. So we can just block access to eastern europe/russia because everything will be hosted there