I've been a professional C, Perl, PHP and Python developer.
I'm an ex-sysadmin from the late 20th century.
These days I do more Javascript and CSS and whatnot, and promote UX and accessibility.
For those of us who work in agencies, this is often not possible, since the clients have certain requirements. We can disagree about whether they're good requirements or not, but we are employed to provide a product to spec.
Yes, not having third-party cookies on your site is a perfectly reasonable approach. In fact, it's the default approach. You only add the banner if you add cookies, and you should be able to explain to your team or client why you're adding those cookies.
That said,
If you still need google analytics for your website, but don't want to use it for retargeting, you can keep doing it using the Cookieless Google Analytics Setup ;)
The letter of the law for cookie consent may be poorly-formed, but the spirit isn't. What we should be doing for our users is not tracking them, whether it's with cookies or any other tech. If it potentially abuses someone's expectation of privacy, then it's a bad thing.
Of course, I wanted to be intentionally a bit provocative here, but you're right, this mostly applies when you build for yourself, and, if you don't have specific marketing requirements (which doesn't hold anymore in agencies). Third-party cookies still have a place, but I really love your sentence: "no third party cookies should be the default approach". That's really what I wanted to share here.
The same goes for the Google Analytics trick: we should not shift cookies to local storage, then, local storage to fingerprinting, then using some obscure privacy-invasive solution (who said FLOC) to track users. My intent is mainly to show that you don't need cookies to be able to perform analytics. You don't need user consent to analyze your HTTP logs to measure the amount of traffic by user referrer. That's basically what a google analytics without third party becomes (and, as it's anonymous, it's not really tracking).
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
For those of us who work in agencies, this is often not possible, since the clients have certain requirements. We can disagree about whether they're good requirements or not, but we are employed to provide a product to spec.
Yes, not having third-party cookies on your site is a perfectly reasonable approach. In fact, it's the default approach. You only add the banner if you add cookies, and you should be able to explain to your team or client why you're adding those cookies.
That said,
The letter of the law for cookie consent may be poorly-formed, but the spirit isn't. What we should be doing for our users is not tracking them, whether it's with cookies or any other tech. If it potentially abuses someone's expectation of privacy, then it's a bad thing.
Thanks a lot for the comment :)
Of course, I wanted to be intentionally a bit provocative here, but you're right, this mostly applies when you build for yourself, and, if you don't have specific marketing requirements (which doesn't hold anymore in agencies). Third-party cookies still have a place, but I really love your sentence: "no third party cookies should be the default approach". That's really what I wanted to share here.
The same goes for the Google Analytics trick: we should not shift cookies to local storage, then, local storage to fingerprinting, then using some obscure privacy-invasive solution (who said FLOC) to track users. My intent is mainly to show that you don't need cookies to be able to perform analytics. You don't need user consent to analyze your HTTP logs to measure the amount of traffic by user referrer. That's basically what a google analytics without third party becomes (and, as it's anonymous, it's not really tracking).