MGmgdev·Sep 23, 2022
FYI, much of their collaboration with Apple is publicly visible in GitHub[0].
[0]:https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
In Meta accused of breaking the law by tracking iPhone usersprivacycg
private-click-measurement
Makefile2021–2022
privacycg / private-click-measurement
private-click-measurement
Private Click Measurement
7Distinct people
8Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
210GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Private Click Measurement
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by month8 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2021-04-07 16:38:17 UTC to 2022-09-23 19:17:57 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2021 | 2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| May 2021 | 2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jun 2021 | 2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Jul 2021 | 2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 2021 | 2021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 2021 | 2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 2021 | 2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 2021 | 2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 2022 | 2022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 2022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Apr 2022 | 2022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2022 | 2022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jun 2022 | 2022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jul 2022 | 2022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 2022 | 2022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 2022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
8 sourcesWhy don't you think the browsers can agree on replacements? Most of the major browsers have proposals for replacing some piece of advertising-related third party cookies [1][2][3].
(Disclosure: I work on ads at Google, speaking only for myself)
[1] Safari: https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement
[2] Edge: https://github.com/WICG/privacy-preserving-ads/blob/main/Par...
[3] Chrome: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-privacy/privacy-sandb...
In Google extends third party cookie deadline until late 2023Apple uses segments for itself, FLoC is a web standard, so third-parties can de-anonymize as a side-effect: https://github.com/WICG/floc/issues/100
Frankly the same problem exists in PCM’s, Apple’s proposed solution to allow private tracking from ad clicks: https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
However, both of these are solutions to help web developers of third-party sites and ad networks track end users anonymously. All would argue that they’re better than third-party cookies, though in reality, users might want to turn off or opt out of both of these anonymize tracking devices.
Another way of putting it: I don’t mind sharing my data with Apple when Apple says to trust them. I also don’t mind sharing data with Google when Google says to trust them. I do both on a regular basis with iCloud and Google Drive for e
Read the rest
xample.
What I have a problem with is when people try to “solve” third-party cookies in a way that doesn’t increase privacy but simply pretends to.
I’m not against first party telemetry data, I love it as an engineer and I know that bugs found and reported with it can be fixed, thus improving my experience with products.
What I dislike is when advertising companies can sign deals with Google or Facebook and gain access to lots of info about how well their campaigns are working, or when I don’t know when my data is being used, or when companies start messing with DNS so third-parties look like first-party just to increase revenue.
To me it says it all that Google apparently turns off FLoC when inside GDPR zones. Only stronger laws will actually prevent bad behaviour on legitimate rule-abiding services. Only providing less and less means of tracking can we truly start to prevent it technically. Looking for replacements to tracking to support existing business models is doomed to failure as long as people can keep voting, literally and figuratively, for privacy-preserving alternatives and policies.
> This causes problems for platforms like Shopify or marketplaces like Alibaba or eBay that may have multiple sellers trying to run ads on a domain and competing for the same small pool of entropy.
This is essentially https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue....
Effectively it boils down to, "how can you distinguish the seller from the website owner?", if you want to give both seller and website owner entropy.
In iOS 14 and Facebook Pixel causing increase in PSL inclusion requests> being added to the PSL reduces your ability to track users
Not really, in fact it can increase your ability to track users if it's (ab)used in specific ways - see use case #2 and #3 here:
https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
In iOS 14 and Facebook Pixel causing increase in PSL inclusion requestsyou're not joking: https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
>Who will vet such a list continuously at a global scale?
>Apple should.
>Apple created this issue in the first place. The need for multi-tenant websites to add themselves to the PSL exists only because of the PCM design decision to limit measurement to registrable domains. The urgency exists because Apple's planned ATT enforcement.
In iOS 14 and Facebook Pixel causing increase in PSL inclusion requestsSummary: Apple introduced PCM [1], and to keep people from using it for cross-site tracking it limits the bits available to a single site (as defined by the PSL). If shop-a.retail.example and shop-b.retail.example are completely separate, and don't want to compete for bits, Apple will still treat them as a single site unless retail.example is on the PSL. Being on the PSL is a big change (partitioned cookies, etc) but could be appropriate for different shops.
FB issued guidance suggesting domains like retail.example consider getting themselves added to the PSL, and now the PSL (a volunteer project) is getting a lot of requests. The PSL project has put these requests on hold, and asked FB and Apple to work this out. FB is talking to Apple in https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
[1] https://webkit.org/blog/1152
Read the rest
This followup issue seems to have a more clear writeup, especially for someone like me who is a bit out of the loop when it comes to the PSL:
https://github.com/privacycg/private-click-measurement/issue...
In iOS 14 and Facebook Pixel causing increase in PSL inclusion requests