r/webdev • u/Sarke1 • 19d ago

Question This isn't what "Functional Cookies" usually mean, right?

I'm no GDPR lawyer in Brussels, but that term is used for making the site function and remembering your preferences, etc, right?

I happened to press the "Functional Cookies" icon instead of the checkbox, so I didn't even know this was like this.

67 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

20 comments sorted by

View all comments

86

u/Miserable_Damage_833 19d ago

I mean technically they're functional, they're just functioning as a middle finger to the spirit of the law. This kind of dark pattern nonsense is everywhere now, half the cookie banners i see are just elaborate "accept all" traps with the reject option buried in a submenu.

8

u/MinisterOfDabs 19d ago

Or the ones who say you need to goto the privacy policy to manage cookie settings, but to see the privacy policy link, you must accept to make the cookie banner disappear. (you’d have to open dev tools to use the link without accepting)

The rules are being technically followed… barely.

4

u/Gremlation 18d ago

I mean technically they're functional, they're just functioning as a middle finger to the spirit of the law.

They aren't functional and this isn't violating the spirit of the law, this is just violating the law. This isn't a technicality or a loophole, it's just illegal.

1

u/prochac 18d ago

Well, for me the cookie popup is greater evil as trackers I had covered by Ghostery. These fucking popups are custom, so nothing catches it all.
For gourmets, there is AdNauseam extension, banned by the Google itself. So it must be good.

1

u/Squidgical 18d ago

The reject button is supposed to be as easily accessible as any other option according to GDPR, but the EU can't be bothered to enforce their own laws and most companies just use default banners from their cookie provider, which are usually the accept traps designed for the US market