tdaxp

Many web sites track or (to use a less friendly word) "spy"on their users. As tdaxp.com sits on top of blogspirit's blog content system, I can view aggregate data about who is accessing my posts. Many other sites use SiteMeter or another third-party tool to get even more detailed information.

Some attempt to hide their espionage, however. One such good example is Dozier Internet Law, PC (a company which forbids hyperlinking). They forbid the "view source" option in a web browser that allows individuals to see what code is being activated by their presense. A view source on Slashdot's copy of their web code reveals the following

<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-294347-1";
urchinTracker();
</script>

Curious about what this (I was inspired by Raise the Hammer's investigation) I searched, and found that it is part of Google Analytics:

Google Analytics' urchinTracker allows you to track events on your site that do not generate a pageview. Using the urchinTracker JavaScript, you can assign a specific page filename to Flash events, JavaScript events, file downloads, outbound links, and more.

For more information on using urchinTracker, please refer to the following help articles:

To be, this presents an ethical dilemma. Dozier eavesdrops on the browsers that visits it. Simultaneously, Dozier's rules make it impossible to notice the eavesdropping while obeying its terms of use. I'm not sure what the ethics rules for "attorney advertising" (which Dozier's website is classified as) are for lawyers in the jurisdiction where they operate, but I assume they do not encourage making informed consent impossible.

Related:

• The code that Dozier runs on your computer.
• Case Study: Dozier and Cuppy's Coffee
• Case Study: Dozier and DirectBuy

At http://www.cybertriallawyer-sucks.com/, is the latest inivtation for Dozier Internet Law to test it's strange interpretation of free speech rights. While not as sublte as similar efforts by Public Citizen, I Hate Linux, or whatithink, or as intellectual as Bill Patry (Google's copyright big-wig)'s take, the site is nonetheless another follow-up to Dozier's strange lawsuits on behalf of DirectBuy and Inventor-Link.