Hacker News Reader

Comment by polytely | Hacker News Reader

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I think things that are required for the functioning of the program/device/service are exempt

View on HN

... and how is Apple supposed to know whether the cookie that is essential or not? This is precisely why the onus is on the website owner.

If the device can work without that ID (which Apple admits it can, since they say they never READ it), then obviously it's not essential

This is the correct view on the matter, in case the grayed out reputation makes you doubt it.

why is this the correct view?

I didn't elaborate because there really isn't any more to say about it. If you've read up on how the GDPR works and know what essential means, you will see this person is correct.

For what it's worth, I have been involved with implementing the GDPR properly in a number of reasonably large companies. Sadly a number of people can say this and a vanishingly small amount of companies actually adhere to it properly, so I'd take it with a grain of salt.

They are exempt from consent but not from the law. Also, GDPR is not about things but their processing purposes. If you use my MAC address to address my network traffic, that's a legitimate business need; no consent is needed. If you use the same MAC address to track me, you need consent.

Right, but Apple isn’t using the adid to track anyone (other than traffic to its own sites). So the gdpr aspects apply to sites, not the phone maker.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com