More than 480 websites recording 'every keystroke' - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE][B]Hundreds of web firms are tracking every single keystroke made by visitors, a study from Princeton University has suggested. [/B] The technique - known as session replay - is used by companies to gain an understanding of how customers use websites. More than 480 websites used the technique, according to the study. Experts questioned the legality of using such software without user consent.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42065650"]BBC[/URL] [url=https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/urllist.txt]Chryseus: Full list of websites with session replay scripts (90,000+)[/url]

I know it says 'more than 480' but 480 is still a pretty low number, I would have thought pretty much all sleazy sites would be doing this. There must be a market for this kind of data

I imagine there's a huge amount more than that (also, who says more than 480? Just say 450 or 500, or give the exact value). As for the legality I imagine what they're doing is technically legal, even if it's going through a loophole in the law. Reminds me of how silly the EU cookie law is, considering how many more ways there are for websites to collect your data

[QUOTE=djjkxbox;52916837]I imagine there's a huge amount more than that (also, who says more than 480? Just say 450 or 500, or give the exact value). As for the legality I imagine what they're doing is technically legal, even if it's going through a loophole in the law. Reminds me of how silly the EU cookie law is, considering how many more ways there are for websites to collect your data[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]They found that 482 of the world's top 50,000 sites used scripts provided by one of these firms. Firms using the software included the UK's news website the Telegraph, Samsung, Reuters, US retail giant Home Depot and CBS News.[/QUOTE] 482 to be specific :v:

[QUOTE=vladnag;52916831]I know it says 'more than 480' but 480 is still a pretty low number, I would have thought pretty much all sleazy sites would be doing this. There must be a market for this kind of data[/QUOTE] There sort of is, but keep in mind that this is only what users type into the websites themselves, at least. It can be used for a wide range of data-driven design approaches. Then again, a lot of people just randomly type stuff apparently, and the data is sent to a third party which is the main privacy issue here. [editline]23rd November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Milkdairy;52916842]482 to be specific :v:[/QUOTE] I'm not surprised to see newspapers in that list. When I turn off ad-blocking on those sites, I usually get about 50 distinct integrations.

[QUOTE=vladnag;52916831]I know it says 'more than 480' but 480 is still a pretty low number, I would have thought pretty much all sleazy sites would be doing this. There must be a market for this kind of data[/QUOTE] I guess the "legally questionable" part scares off most companies, smaller companies could be ruined if they get busted, and larger companies that have lawyers running around keeping things legit and popping up whenever a board member suggests something that may be unlawful. Lawbreaking is bad for business if the feds find out, it smears their reputation and there's no money to be made, only spent on court fees and fines. Plus, why risk your ass when you could just but cheap bundles of private information from Facebook or Comcast for your market research? [editline]23rd November 2017[/editline] On the other hand you have media companies installing DRM malware without permission and banks laundering money for terrorists.

[QUOTE=vladnag;52916831]I know it says 'more than 480' but 480 is still a pretty low number, I would have thought pretty much all sleazy sites would be doing this. There must be a market for this kind of data[/QUOTE] I mean I guess it depends who's doing it. 480 could easily encompass 90 percent of websites I use. And since I use like 10 websites regularly, it could encompass them 48 times over.

The full list has 96,718 sites, unsurprisingly quite a few porn sites are on there and a large percentage (around 1/3) are Russian websites. Here is a [url=https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/hosts]hosts[/url] file if you want to block them, or a plain url [url=https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/urllist.txt]list[/url] you can use with ublock.

[QUOTE=Chryseus;52916911]The full list has 96,718 sites, unsurprisingly quite a few porn sites are on there and a large percentage (around 1/3) are Russian websites. Here is a [URL="https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/hosts"]hosts[/URL] file if you want to block them, or a plain url [URL="https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/urllist.txt"]list[/URL] you can use with ublock.[/QUOTE] Didn't catch this. Will put the source in OP.

Wow, Reuters is on that list? That would explain why the site lags like a motherfucker on older computers without an adblock. I always found that strange considering their website doesn't have many ads that would cause that slowdown.

Including facepunch to give Garry better feedback.

[QUOTE=mark6789;52917057]Including facepunch to give Garry better feedback.[/QUOTE] Newpunch will allow you to sell your browser data for forum coins.

Oh no not cumsearcher.porn :why:

aaaa, it includes wordpress, newegg, various retail stores, spotify, skype, evernote, prezi, etc [editline]23rd November 2017[/editline] Not to mention common stuff that's side-loaded (not the right term but close enough) everywhere like taboola, outbrain, etc Are there any addons that target session replay scripts in particular?

Oh hey, every eastern european and russian file hosting site and almost every US cable on-demand provider portal I am [I]shocked[/I]

It surprises me that Facebook isn't on that big list.

[QUOTE=Mastermind of42;52917230]aaaa, it includes wordpress, newegg, various retail stores, spotify, skype, evernote, prezi, etc [editline]23rd November 2017[/editline] Not to mention common stuff that's side-loaded (not the right term but close enough) everywhere like taboola, outbrain, etc Are there any addons that target session replay scripts in particular?[/QUOTE] I still added the list to my uBlock. I get a warning whenever I visit one of them, and you can suspend the warning for the session anyway.

[QUOTE=markg06;52917275]It surprises me that Facebook isn't on that big list.[/QUOTE] Facebook likely have other mechanisms of getting user interaction data. They almost certainly use something similar to make sure their UI isn't total arse. These kinds of utilities are a odd thing for sure. I've interacted with one or two of them before. It's quite useful from a UX perspective to see what a customer on your site was doing almost exactly (there are discrepancies with dynamic page content and input fields not showing the actual data to give some semblance of data security). But it's not exactly fair to be recording this information without informing customers. Almost every major retail site, entertainment site, etc. on the Internet will implement one of these as it's important to them that they know how to change their site to drive clicks.

[QUOTE=Chryseus;52916911]The full list has 96,718 sites, unsurprisingly quite a few porn sites are on there and a large percentage (around 1/3) are Russian websites. Here is a [url=https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/hosts]hosts[/url] file if you want to block them, or a plain url [url=https://chryseus.co.uk/junk/urllist.txt]list[/url] you can use with ublock.[/QUOTE] yep that's about the entire czech and slovak internet there fucking amazing

Some legitimate websites are on there too, like blue apron. Interesting. Also interesting is the sheer amount of fake google/amazons in that list :v:

What if most of those are due to specific ads? False positives? I don't think a simple bus service timetable website (menetrendek.hu) really benefits much from my data. It displays few news and weather info, and an ad on the side.

[QUOTE=ichiman94;52917501]What if most of those are due to specific ads? False positives? I don't think a simple bus service timetable website (menetrendek.hu) really benefits much from my data. It displays few news and weather info, and an ad on the side.[/QUOTE] Services like Hotjar, etc. that this investigation also covers aren't just gathering things like keystrokes. They track mouse movements and page interactions and allow the clients to replay user sessions (give or take some minor discrepancies). Even for a news and weather site that could be useful for working out if the current layout provides good UX or not. It's almost certainly not from an ad, these kinds of things are implemented by the developer of the site.

Has suggested. So this is news or just a vague impression of news?

[QUOTE=Mastermind of42;52917230][...] Are there any addons that target session replay scripts in particular?[/QUOTE] Privacy blockers should catch them. I use [URL="https://www.eff.org/privacybadger"]Privacy Badger[/URL]. There's also Ghostery, but I don't really trust them as much as the EFF.

I still don't understand why we can't sell our data to these companies ourselves. I mean if they are willing to pay for it why can't we we sell it directly? Why should all these datamining services get paid for OUR data? That's theft.

[QUOTE=shad0w440;52917821]I still don't understand why we can't sell our data directly to these companies I mean if they are willing to pay for it why can't we we sell it directly? Why should all these datamining services get paid for OUR data? That's theft.[/QUOTE] I think there are some browser addons that let you do that for some tiny amount of credits/whatever.

this data is also great for true random number generators

oh come on even minecraft.net

Oh damn, a lot of big danish sites too.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;52917898]oh come on even minecraft.net[/QUOTE] Welp. Now we have an excuse to take down Minecraft and replace it with Terraria.