Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Chrome, Third-Party Cookies, and Related Website Sets (RWS)

  • Chrome has backed off fully deprecating third‑party cookies; instead it plans a user “choice” flow, with unclear UX details.
  • RWS / First‑Party Sets let groups of domains share storage as if they were one “site,” bypassing normal third‑party cookie blocking.
  • A central list (in a Google-controlled repo) defines these sets; sites must apply for inclusion. Critics see this as Google becoming a global arbiter of cross-site tracking.
  • Some argue this solves real legacy problems (e.g., multi-domain properties like Stack Exchange login), but others say those sites had years to consolidate under one domain.

User Study and Misleading UX Concerns

  • A small Brave study found users often misjudge whether two domains belong to the same organization.
  • Many participants believed Chrome was protecting them when, under RWS rules, cross-site tracking would still occur.
  • Commenters highlight this as evidence that “user choice” dialogs around tracking are easily deceptive.

Impact on Other Browsers and Standards

  • RWS is a Google proposal; Firefox and Safari have publicly said they won’t implement it.
  • Several expect Chrome to ship it anyway, “not on any standards track,” leveraging market dominance.
  • Non‑Chromium browsers may be pressured if major sites rely on Chrome-only behavior, though some argue Safari’s market share and history of blocking third‑party cookies mitigates this.

Browser Ecosystem, Funding, and Trust

  • Many note virtually all major browsers are funded directly or indirectly by advertising (Chrome, Brave, Edge, Safari via Google search deals, Firefox via Google).
  • There is heated debate over Brave’s credibility (crypto/BAT model, past affiliate/VPN issues) versus its strong default privacy posture.
  • Firefox is praised for privacy and customization but criticized for management, ad-tech partnerships, and dependence on Google.
  • Concerns about Chromium monoculture: bugs, backdoors, or anti‑privacy “features” can propagate across most browsers.

Broader Privacy, Tracking, and Ads Debate

  • Some accept coarse-grained profiling if they’re in large anonymity sets; others are “anti-tracking absolutists.”
  • Strong desire for browsers to fight fingerprinting (canvas, GPU, audio devices, extensions), not just cookies.
  • Many argue free content doesn’t justify pervasive surveillance; contextual ads and user-paid models are seen as underexplored alternatives.