Do Not Track is a signal that users can set in their browsers to tell websites they don’t want their online visits tracked by companies with whom they have no relationship. It is optional for websites and tracking services to respect the users wishes. But because Do Not Track has been endorsed by the FTC the biggest advertising companies, which covers 90% of the US market (including Google, Twitter and others) have commited to respect Do Not Track until the end of the year. The comments of the EU data protection policy votes for Do Not Track too.

Do Not Track is currently under discussion at the W3C. The latest draft standard was published on 29 May. Many of the details are still up for grabs. It seems, that only third-party sites have to respect Do Not Track to follow the W3C standard. Websites called directly by clicking a link or by enter the URL in the browser (first-party sites) may going on with tracking even if Do Not Track was enabled.

A week ago the Senate Commerce Committee took up the issue of online tracking and the Do Not Track flag. B. Liodice from the advertising industry’s began to argue that widespread data collection about our everyday Internet browsing habits was necessary for cybersecurity. This included issues such as online sexual predators and identity theft.

This argument raises a much larger point. The EFF.org wrote:

In yesterday’s Senate hearing, we heard the advertising industry admit that their near-ubiquitous online tracking program is being used for issues that are the purview of law enforcement. That raises a host of questions all on its own, but one thing is certain: with these statements we have even more reason to stand up for a surveillance-free Internet. EFF.org, June 29, 2012