×
Well done. You've clicked the tower. This would actually achieve something if you had logged in first. Use the key for that. The name takes you home. This is where all the applicables sit. And you can't apply any changes to my site unless you are logged in.

Our policy is best summarized as "we don't care about _you_, we care about _them_", no emails, so no forgetting your password. You have no rights. It's like you don't even exist. If you publish material, I reserve the right to remove it, or use it myself.

Don't impersonate. Don't name someone involuntarily. You can lose everything if you cross the line, and no, I won't cancel your automatic payments first, so you'll have to do it the hard way. See how serious this sounds? That's how serious you're meant to take these.

×
Register


Required. 150 characters or fewer. Letters, digits and @/./+/-/_ only.
  • Your password can’t be too similar to your other personal information.
  • Your password must contain at least 8 characters.
  • Your password can’t be a commonly used password.
  • Your password can’t be entirely numeric.
Enter the same password as before, for verification.
Login

Grow A Dic
Define A Word
Make Space
Set Task
Mark Post
Apply Votestyle
Create Votes
(From: saved spaces)
Exclude Votes
Apply Dic
Exclude Dic

A Public and Reproducible Assessment of the Topics API on Real Data

Click here to flash read.

arXiv:2403.19577v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: The Topics API for the web is Google's privacy-enhancing alternative to replace third-party cookies. Results of prior work have led to an ongoing discussion between Google and research communities about the capability of Topics to trade off both utility and privacy. The central point of contention is largely around the realism of the datasets used in these analyses and their reproducibility; researchers using data collected on a small sample of users or generating synthetic datasets, while Google's results are inferred from a private dataset. In this paper, we complement prior research by performing a reproducible assessment of the latest version of the Topics API on the largest and publicly available dataset of real browsing histories. First, we measure how unique and stable real users' interests are over time. Then, we evaluate if Topics can be used to fingerprint the users from these real browsing traces by adapting methodologies from prior privacy studies. Finally, we call on web actors to perform and enable reproducible evaluations by releasing anonymized distributions. We find that 46%, 55%, and 60% of the 1207 users in the dataset are uniquely re-identified across websites after only 1, 2, and 3 observations of their topics by advertisers, respectively. This paper shows on real data that Topics does not provide the same privacy guarantees to all users, further highlighting the need for public and reproducible evaluations of the claims made by new web proposals.

Click here to read this post out
ID: 808325; Unique Viewers: 0
Unique Voters: 0
Total Votes: 0
Votes:
Latest Change: March 29, 2024, 7:31 a.m. Changes:
/u/anonymous
Dictionaries:
Words:
Spaces:
Views: 16
CC:
No creative common's license
Comments: