Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12
Geocaching HQ

Release Notes (Privacy law compliance) - December 31, 2019

Recommended Posts

Since the last Update I can't see the last logs on the bottom of the page. Only when clicking on view logbook.

Is this a bug or a new feature??? I find it very helpfull to see what the last log was about (find/ not find...)

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, PFALZB0CK said:

Since the last Update I can't see the last logs on the bottom of the page. Only when clicking on view logbook.

Is this a bug or a new feature??? I find it very helpfull to see what the last log was about (find/ not find...)

I'm reading two different things: how is the last log, on the bottom of the page, helpful?  Then you mention the most recent log, which would be at the top. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I'm reading two different things: how is the last log, on the bottom of the page, helpful?  Then you mention the most recent log, which would be at the top. 

 

The "last log" is the most recent one, at least in the version of English we speak here, as opposed to the "first log" which would be the earliest.

Share this post


Link to post

Use "most recent" and "oldest" problem solved and no need for nitpicking on choice of words. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, on4bam said:

Use "most recent" and "oldest" problem solved and no need for nitpicking on choice of words. ;)

 

Yeah, the confusion probably comes from the "bottom of the page",  since the place where the most recent logs would be is at the bottom if no logs at all are showing. When I go to any cache page now, I initially see no logs and then about four or five seconds later the logs appear.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/1/2020 at 5:01 AM, zookeepertx said:

If we have MORE cookies, to me that sounds like LESS privacy.

 

I don't think you understand.

 

This site always used cookies.  Most if not all sites you visit use cookies.  That's not what has changed.  Sites are being required to be up front about what cookies they use and how, and give users more options to opt out.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, hzoi said:

 

I don't think you understand.

 

This site always used cookies.  Most if not all sites you visit use cookies.  That's not what has changed.  Sites are being required to be up front about what cookies they use and how, and give users more options to opt out.

Correct. In the past, if you didn't block/deleted certain cookies then ALL cookies were set. Now there's a choice which cookies can be set. Functional cookies are needed (you would be forced to log in after every click on a link if you didn't allow them) but analytical and advertisement cookies are not required to have everything working on a website so you can (should) deny them. Most are used to track you between sites anyway so companies can see you're using GC, facebook, amazon..... and combine info on what you were watching to show you ads or even show other info on a webpage.

For many years I'm only allowing strictly necessary cookies only as everything is blocked by default. On sites I often visit I will set some domains "trusted" and others will remain blocked or "temporary trusted" (that means they will be blocked again when I restart my browser). Every few weeks I clean out my cookies too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Hello,

 

1. can't change coordinates (if I hover over the coordinates 'https://www.geocaching.com/seek/#' appears in the firefox/internet exploerer 11/edge/chrome/opera status line)

2. can't create new lists on bookmark page

 

There seem to be some serious bugs in the updated website.

 

Update:

found the 'create list' under 'My Lists', but thats seem not to be a user friendly solution

Edited by 3caps

Share this post


Link to post

terrain and rating don't display properly in IE 11 (new install of win10 pro). tried clearing cache, reboot, etc. (Chrome and Edge appear to populate correctly)

 

IE11_images_icons.thumb.JPG.d0223c1e59b11a2bb5be91e981643453.JPG

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

How do I agree?

Clipboard01.jpg.2d9109c7fa88e7e5e41885bfd07c2c66.jpg

 

There is no activity linked to the "I agree" button

<body>
    <div class="tou-modal gc-modal">
        <div class="gc-modal-body">
            <h3>We have updated our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy</h3>
            <p>You must agree to our updated <a href="/about/termsofuse.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Terms of Use</a> and <a href="/about/privacypolicy.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Privacy Policy</a> to continue using our site.</p>
            <button class="gc-button gc-button-has-type gc-button-primary" id="tou-agreement">
                I agree
            </button>
        </div>
    </div>

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Scarch said:

terrain and rating don't display properly in IE 11 (new install of win10 pro). tried clearing cache, reboot, etc. (Chrome and Edge appear to populate correctly)

 

IE11_images_icons.thumb.JPG.d0223c1e59b11a2bb5be91e981643453.JPG

 

That looks like the problem reported here:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arisoft said:

How do I agree?

Clipboard01.jpg.2d9109c7fa88e7e5e41885bfd07c2c66.jpg

 

There is no activity linked to the "I agree" button


<body>
    <div class="tou-modal gc-modal">
        <div class="gc-modal-body">
            <h3>We have updated our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy</h3>
            <p>You must agree to our updated <a href="/about/termsofuse.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Terms of Use</a> and <a href="/about/privacypolicy.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Privacy Policy</a> to continue using our site.</p>
            <button class="gc-button gc-button-has-type gc-button-primary" id="tou-agreement">
                I agree
            </button>
        </div>
    </div>

 

 

It worked for me. I didn't look further, but I expect there's some JavaScript wizardry happening using the "id" attribute as a reference that allows the button to do things. Given that there seem to be widespread JavaScript issues across the site with some browsers, you may just need to try different browsers until you find one that lets you click the button.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just tried redirecting any traffic for cookiebot.com to a bogus IP address using the hosts file, but I'm still seeing the same issues as before. These are:

  • When opening a cache listing page, any JavaScript-dependent features take several seconds to load. These include the Favorite Point feature, the coordinate edit feature, the personal cache note, the hint decryption, the mini-map, and the logs. Attempting to click on things like the coordinate edit feature or the hint decryption too quickly results in navigation to https://www.geocaching.com/seek/#
  • On the new logging page, it takes several seconds for the form to fully load. Before it does, the log type and date selectors are without their normal styling and many features are missing (photo feature, award a FP, Report a problem, and trackables). After a few seconds, all of these load as expected. Clicking in the text field before everything else has loaded gets overridden when it does eventually load, losing the focus.
  • Some links are non-functional for several seconds when the page first loads. For example, if you go to a log where you've uploaded an image and click "Edit Image", you're taken to the page where you can make changes for that image. For the first several seconds, clicking any of the links on that page (e.g. Edit Image Details) does nothing.

All of the above was observed with Firefox 71.0. These are just the things I noticed while logging some finds last night. I'm sure there are many other similar issues scattered across the site.

 

In addition, there are still issues with IE11/Edge that I reported earlier. The most noticeable one I've seen is that clicking the tabs on someone's public profile just loops back to the profile page again and doesn't actually switch to the desired tab.

 

It definitely seems like there's something wrong with JavaScript on the site, because every issue I've seen is related to JS in some way.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

@The A - Team, Do you have a cached copy of that cruftware in your system?  I'd try clearing the browser cache if you haven't already.

 

I know that code has never succeeded in getting into my system (NoScript, now plus router-level blocking), and maybe that's why things are fine at my end.

 

Edited by Viajero Perdido

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

 

It worked for me. I didn't look further, but I expect there's some JavaScript wizardry happening using the "id" attribute as a reference that allows the button to do things. Given that there seem to be widespread JavaScript issues across the site with some browsers, you may just need to try different browsers until you find one that lets you click the button.

 

I had to hit "refresh." Then the "agree" popup went away.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Viajero Perdido said:

@The A - Team, Do you have a cached copy of that cruftware in your system?  I'd try clearing the browser cache if you haven't already.

 

I know that code has never succeeded in getting into my system (NoScript, now plus router-level blocking), and maybe that's why things are fine at my end.

 

I hadn't cleared the cache, so I just did. No change.

 

Looking at the cookies that are stored after logging back into the site and accepting the default cookies again, I don't see cookiebot.com in the list. I didn't see it earlier even before editing the hosts file, so that one doesn't seem to be storing anything in my case and must not be the cause of my issues.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Today, we have made additional updates related to California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and other privacy law compliance.
 
We are providing users with additional control over the information they share with our Authorized Developers through the Authorizations tab in Account settings. Users who choose not to share with Authorized Developers will be displayed as “opted-out user”. Their log content will display as: "Content unavailable. This user has opted-out of sharing certain information with API Authorized Developers."
 
In addition, we have an updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. All users will see a pop-up where you can read and consent to the new policies.

 

We have updated the thread's original post to reflect today's updates.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I've started a separate thread discussing the NEW section 3f of the TOU which isn't mentioned in the updates.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Geocaching HQ said:

We are providing users with additional control over the information they share with our Authorized Developers through the Authorizations tab in Account settings. Users who choose not to share with Authorized Developers will be displayed as “opted-out user”. Their log content will display as: "Content unavailable. This user has opted-out of sharing certain information with API Authorized Developers."

 

A couple of questions:

  1. When I go to the Authorizations section of my account, there are two options. The second option is regarding friends and is pretty self-explanatory. The first says I can deny access to my "public profile information". When I follow the associated "Learn more" link, the resulting article doesn't really help clarify things. It says:
    Quote

    To stop sharing your public profile and other information from Geoaching.com with our Authorized Developers and users of our Authorized Developers’ websites and applications, opt out in the Authorizations tab of your Account Settings.

    What is "other information"? It would be good if this article could detail the information affected by this setting. Notably, it doesn't mention log content.
     
  2. If I'm understanding your post correctly, if a user opts out with this setting, I wouldn't be able to see their log in GSAK, Cachly, or any other API-using application? That seems really, really bad. Like, really, really, really bad. Logs are explicitly made in order to be public information. I don't want logs to disappear behind a wall of "privacy".
  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

Website is completely unusable - I click on "I agree" but nothing happens.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, thomfre said:

I recommend trying https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm?hl=en and/or https://pi-hole.net/

It will make the whole internet better for you. And it will make geocaching.com work again, if you block cookiebot.com.

I have uBlock Origin but it doesn't help. Bugs in Groundspeak website should be fixed by Groundspeak, not by the user.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, hcy said:

Website is completely unusable - I click on "I agree" but nothing happens.

 

 

 In Firefox you have to right click the banner and select Inspect element then right click <div class="tou-modal gc-modal"> and select delete node. Now you can use the website without the agreement.

Edited by arisoft
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, arisoft said:

 

 In forefox you have to right click the banner and select Inspect element then right click <div class="tou-modal gc-modal"> and select delete node. Now you can use the website without the agreement.

I use Chrome but this can be only a workaround, bug must be fixed by Groundspeak.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, hcy said:

I use Chrome but this can be only a workaround, bug must be fixed by Groundspeak.

 

 

Of course but it may take a while.

Share this post


Link to post

It's kind of funny. The changes that were made a few days ago should have been made a long time ago, like when GDPR came into effect ;)

 

BTW, recently a website in Belgium was fined €15000 for not letting users choose which cookies to accept. The case was used as "an example" and now has others rushing to make their site compliant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The A-Team said:

 

A couple of questions:

  1. When I go to the Authorizations section of my account, there are two options. The second option is regarding friends and is pretty self-explanatory. The first says I can deny access to my "public profile information". When I follow the associated "Learn more" link, the resulting article doesn't really help clarify things. It says: What is "other information"? It would be good if this article could detail the information affected by this setting. Notably, it doesn't mention log content.
     
  2. If I'm understanding your post correctly, if a user opts out with this setting, I wouldn't be able to see their log in GSAK, Cachly, or any other API-using application? That seems really, really bad. Like, really, really, really bad. Logs are explicitly made in order to be public information. I don't want logs to disappear behind a wall of "privacy".

The world has gone completely bonkers, every web site I visit nowadays has a cookie button to click, drives me nuts. Now we have all these extra restrictions added by big brother on a whim, a very extreme interpretation driven by fear. As far as I know nothing in GDPR or anything else forbids sharing stuff I have willingly posted as a log. It mostly relates to personal data such as emails, phone numbers etc etc. Also how many companies make radical changes at New Year during the holiday period. Most organisations forbid changes at such a time. Finally how did we survive 5 years ago without this so called "protection". It is just a game folks that is sadly turning into a sinister business.

Edited by lodgebarn
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, arisoft said:

How do I agree?

Clipboard01.jpg.2d9109c7fa88e7e5e41885bfd07c2c66.jpg

 

There is no activity linked to the "I agree" button

 

 

I have the same issue. When I click "agree" there is a slight color change, indicating the terms of use pop up is noticing my input. However, nothing occurs when I click it. 

Share this post


Link to post

Can't believe we haven't heard anything from gc.com on this yet.

I'm in the stuck on "I Agree" camp.  Issues with both Chrome and Firefox.

Even the workaround isn't happening.  Again, seems no code associated with button here

 


<div class="gc-modal-body">
        <h3>We have updated our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy</h3>
        <p>You must agree to our updated <a href="/about/termsofuse.aspx" target="_blank">Terms of Use</a> and <a href="/about/privacypolicy.aspx" target="_blank">Privacy Policy</a> to continue using our site.</p>
        <button class="gc-button gc-button-has-type gc-button-primary" id="tou-agreement">
            I agree
        </button>
    </div>

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Geocaching HQ said:

we have an updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. All users will see a pop-up where you can read and consent to the new policies.

 

Where is the summary of the changes? I'm offended at being asked to accept the new versions, many pages long, implying that I'm supposed to analyze the new vs old and figure out what the changes are, when Groundspeak already knows.

 

Yes, I realize this is SOP on the web. That doesn't make it right, and I expect better from Groundspeak.

 

Edward

  • Upvote 6
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hcy said:

Website is completely unusable - I click on "I agree" but nothing happens.

 

We are looking into this issue. Thank you for sharing your OS and browsers with us as we try to identify the issue. If anyone can share the specific webpage address of the page/s they land on when they see the "I agree" modal when they aren't able to click on the button, that would also be helpful.
 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, The Campers said:

Can't get pass 

We have updated our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

You must agree to our updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using our site.

I agree

Clicking I Agree does nothing.

Same.

Share this post


Link to post

With the new crazy API change, where even data for users that have explicitly authorized an app gets blocked, how can you continue to let c:geo operate?

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, thomfre said:

With the new crazy API change, where even data for users that have explicitly authorized an app gets blocked, how can you continue to let [snip] operate?

That app does not use the API, and deliberately acts like a regular browser so it can scrape data from the site.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, niraD said:

That app does not use the API, and deliberately acts like a regular browser so it can scrape data from the site.

I know very well how it works. My question is how Groundspeak can continue to allow that to happen now.

Edit: There are ways to detect c:geo, Groundspeak can block the app - if they want to.

Edited by thomfre
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, thomfre said:

I know very well how it works. My question is how Groundspeak can continue to allow that to happen now.

 

Let me try again...

9 minutes ago, niraD said:

That app does not use the API, and deliberately acts like a regular browser so it can scrape data from the site.

 

My guess is that Groundspeak doesn't want to block access to user agents that act like regular browsers.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Oceansazul said:

If anyone can share the specific webpage address of the page/s they land on when they see the "I agree" modal when they aren't able to click on the button, that would also be helpful.

We are not your quality assurance team but the modal dialog shows up on every page.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Geocaching HQ said:

We are providing users with additional control over the information they share with our Authorized Developers through the Authorizations tab in Account settings. Users who choose not to share with Authorized Developers will be displayed as “opted-out user”. Their log content will display as: "Content unavailable. This user has opted-out of sharing certain information with API Authorized Developers."

 

I'm just wondering how this impacts challenge cacher checkers for cachers who have opted out. Specifically, since COs are now responsible for determining whether or not someone has qualified for a challenge, if the required information isn't available to project-gc how is this meant to work? My own challenges rely on acquired attributes and this information isn't readily available on the geocaching website even if the cacher still shows their statistics on their profile.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I'm just wondering how this impacts challenge cacher checkers for cachers who have opted out. Specifically, since COs are now responsible for determining whether or not someone has qualified for a challenge, if the required information isn't available to project-gc how is this meant to work? My own challenges rely on acquired attributes and this information isn't readily available on the geocaching website even if the cacher still shows their statistics on their profile.

Unless Project-GC is given special permissions, you can't check it anymore for opted-out-users.

Edit: just tested. Challenge checkers doesn't work for opted-out-users. And they won't be able to run them themselves either.

To be honest, this is just stupid. And has nothing to do with privacy.

Edited by thomfre
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, thomfre said:

Edit: just tested. Challenge checkers doesn't work for opted-out-users. And they won't be able to run them themselves either.

 

The guidelines say we can't ask a finder to document their qualification on post-moratorium challenges, so do we have to just take their word for it that they qualify? Or can we delete such a log as being unverifiable? Some clarification of this would be helpful.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

The guidelines say we can't ask a finder to document their qualification on post-moratorium challenges, so do we have to just take their word for it that they qualify? Or can we delete such a log as being unverifiable? Some clarification of this would be helpful.

Maybe this will change the type of challenges we're allowed to create. This is from the challenge cache guidelines:
 

Quote
  • Challenge owners will need to make sure that cachers can show that they have completed the cache requirements without compromising their privacy.


But they also say:
 

Quote
  • Cachers may sign a challenge cache's physical log at any time. However, the challenge cache may be logged as found online only after the log is signed and the challenge tasks have been met and documented.
  • For cache pages published after April 21, 2015 with a challenge checker, the owner can confirm the finder's qualification with the checker when the cache is logged as found. No further documentation is required from the finder.

So unless you're able to verify with a checker, I will say that it's up to the finder to prove that they are qualified. If not, you should be allowed to delete the log.

Edited by thomfre
  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, thomfre said:

Maybe this will change the type of challenges we're allowed to create. This is from the challenge cache guidelines:
 

Quote
  • Challenge owners will need to make sure that cachers can show that they have completed the cache requirements without compromising their privacy.

 

 

I'm sure when that guideline was written they were thinking of things like home location, not how many caches someone's found with particular attributes.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, thomfre said:

So unless you're able to verify with a checker, I will say that it's up to the finder to prove that they are qualified. If not, you should be allowed to delete the log.

 

This is the only logical solution because the guideline expects that the owner can confirm the finder's qualification with the checker.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 12/31/2019 at 3:56 PM, msrubble said:

I can see logs as normal on traditional caches, mystery caches, multis, and earthcaches, but not on events.

 

The small map does not appear at all.

 

[edited steps taken]

 

Since then, I have also discovered that I cannot log an event using the "new logging experience." I see the endless Javascript-not-loading spinning circle.

 

I cannot download the GPX file from any cache page.

 

All of the above applies to Seamonkey (Firefox family) on Windows 10.

 

Groundspeak fixed the inability to write a log in the "new logging experience," and, I think the inability to download a GPX file from a cache page.

 

Blocking cookiebot.com allows me to see events logs at the bottom of a cache page without clicking on View Logbook, and restores the small map on cache pages.

Edited by msrubble

Share this post


Link to post

I'd just like to add, I'm not sure if it is because of the web-based scripting updates here, but I've also noticed that many of the website buttons and functions no longer work as immediately as they used to because of the passive loading of scripts. There's no indication that buttons are now 'active', so it looks like the page is loaded, you click the 'button' and are taken to the alternate url page (like a regular link) because the scripting hasn't loaded yet. IF the button has a link, otherwise it does nothing at all (see the "I agree" button doing nothing complaints).

 

Something has changed with the order of, or the asynchronous loading of, essential UI scripts, and it wasn't this way before the update... don't know if it's currently being looked into, but I just wanted to get my two (slightly annoyed) cents in ;P

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

Well, it seems to be working now. I can click "accept" and it accepts. Odd.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, thomfre said:

Unless Project-GC is given special permissions, you can't check it anymore for opted-out-users.

Edit: just tested. Challenge checkers doesn't work for opted-out-users. And they won't be able to run them themselves either.

To be honest, this is just stupid. And has nothing to do with privacy.

 

Lawmakers believe otherwise.  The ability to opt out of data selling/data sharing with third parties is a cornerstone of many privacy laws, current or proposed, including CCPA.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/31/2019 at 11:45 PM, Twentse Mug said:

I get a strange error message when I want to look at https://status.geocaching.com/

In Firefox 71 it says :

 

Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for status.geocaching.com. The certificate is only valid for secure-stats.pingdom.com.
 
Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN

 

The certificate for secure-stats.pingdom.com get loaded instead of a certificate for status.geocaching.com

HTTP Works fine http://status.geocaching.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12

×
×
  • Create New...