Are tracking cookies necessarily evil?

[Muse]

My SuperAntiSpyware found 11 tracking cookies in a Quick Scan on my desktop yesterday. At the end it quarantined them all, the default behavior. I figured this was probably a way to keep nosy bastards from selling my email address to spammers or similar. Looking a bit I see that a TC can be just something like a saved shopping cart, maybe a wish list, maybe just some preferences that might be used next time I visit the site. Or am I wrong there? Is SAS being too aggressive, or is it's ID of a TC more stringent than usual?

 

[Fardringle]

Most cookies are harmless and simply allow the site to know that you have visited before and to remember your preferences (or a shopping cart). However, some can be used in harmful ways so security software like SuperAntiSpyware gets rid of all of them in order to be safe.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Does the application support whitelisting cookies from certain sites? I like them, they remember page view settings, login info etc. Don't mind recommended products on most retail sites because they are actually kind of useful a lot of the time.

 

[Muse]

Most cookies are harmless and simply allow the site to know that you have visited before and to remember your preferences (or a shopping cart). However, some can be used in harmful ways so security software like SuperAntiSpyware gets rid of all of them in order to be safe.

So, I'm to believe then that the ones IDed as "tracking cookie" by SAS are determined to be detrimental, bad cookies rather than good cookies? It's just a matter of trusting SAS to have made these determinations on my behalf. Seems to me this merits discussion! 😱

 

[Muse]

Does the application support whitelisting cookies from certain sites? I like them, they remember page view settings, login info etc. Don't mind recommended products on most retail sites because they are actually kind of useful a lot of the time.

AFAIK, not in an up front way. You do view the list of by-default-checked cookies that the program is about to quarantine and can uncheck any you don't agree with.

 

[BassBomb]

how can the cookies be used in a bad way?

 

[Fardringle]

So, I'm to believe then that the ones IDed as "tracking cookie" by SAS are determined to be detrimental, bad cookies rather than good cookies? It's just a matter of trusting SAS to have made these determinations on my behalf. Seems to me this merits discussion! 😱

No. It "detects" all tracking cookies and then lists the cookies for you to decide whether you want to delete them or not.

 

[lxskllr]

Tracking cookies generally aren't a problem. To eliminate many of them disable 3rd party cookies in your browser. I take the stance that 3rd parties have no business installing things on my machine. If the cookie's required, the 1st party will put it there.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Harmless, unless you accidentally click a hostile link disguised as a reported post and have your login credentials harvested by an exploit in the way the forum software stores your auto-login credentials (as a cookie) leading to some punk kid gaining administrator access to an online community.

 

[Muse]

No. It "detects" all tracking cookies and then lists the cookies for you to decide whether you want to delete them or not.

Thank you. Well, I'll make a point of investigating each one, or at least try to. Have never done that. Is it straightforward determining what SAS is referring to?

 

[balloonshark]

More info on cookies can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_cookie

Before you run a scan of any kind it's generally a good idea to run a program such as ccleaner. It would delete cookies, cache, etc. which should speed up your scan times.

A host file can also block tracking cookies and if your using Firefox, the AdBlockPlus add-on has a tracking filter that can block many things.

If your interested in CCleaner I recommend the "Slim" build that doesn't include the toolbar so you don't have to untick the option on install.

 

[Lemon law]

In a simplistic way of thinking, there is nothing wrong with a cookie that restricts its mission to navigating its own given website.

But as soon as it violates our trust and reports on what other web sites we visit, it becomes a TRACKING cookie, and worthy of only a death sentence. And my policy is that any TRACKING cookie should have a lifespan that is nasty, brutish, and short anytime I find such a rascal on my computer. As a zero tolerance policy.

 

[Fallen Kell]

how can the cookies be used in a bad way?

They can gather and collect a significant number of websites that you visit. If you also happen to use a username and/or your address to one of the affiliated sites with that cookie, they can then tie all those websites directly to your name and address, and sell that data to advertising agencies and wholesalers...