Anybody have references to the technical details behind this change?
One way I can think of would be to use ETag headers, which are intended to be used for caching but can be abused for tracking purposes[1] since by definition the browser is required to send back the server-provided ETag value.
Alternatively (or additionally), browser fingerprinting[2] seems like the perfect candidate technology to replace cookies for tracking purposes, since it can't easily be "cleared".
> Google has resisted efforts to block cookies on its Chrome browser.
This doesn't seem quite right to me. I've been using Chrome's built-in third party cookie blocking for at least a couple years now. Coming from Firefox, that was one of the biggest things I missed at first in Chrome, so it remember being relieved when it was added relatively quickly.
One way I can think of would be to use ETag headers, which are intended to be used for caching but can be abused for tracking purposes[1] since by definition the browser is required to send back the server-provided ETag value.
Alternatively (or additionally), browser fingerprinting[2] seems like the perfect candidate technology to replace cookies for tracking purposes, since it can't easily be "cleared".
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_ETag#Tracking_using_ETags [2] https://panopticlick.eff.org