It depends on why you care about the distinction. If you're talking from a purely privacy perspective, the important questions are (1) are you taking analytics? (2) what are you doing with them? (3) is that in line with users' expectations?
Third party, or third party disguised as first party, is only problematic because of an implied "there's very little keeping the third party from using your data for things that aren't just analytics for the first party." It's the red flag for "this site may not be using your data the way you would want it to."
Third party ad trackers disguised as first party cookies specifically violate the general assumption that first party data stays first party, because those third parties have specific mechanisms to track you across multiple first parties.
> violate the general assumption that first party data stays first party
How? Because they can't do that with cookies.
I think the most prominent objection to 3rd party cookies is they allow systematic tracking. This seems like they just help eg apple or whomever understand what you're doing on that same site.
My point is exactly that: they can and are doing it (using first party cookies through CNAME redirects to correlate your identity across multiple independent sites in order to sell a data product to more than just the first party). For an example, see Criteo.
> I think the most prominent objection to 3rd party cookies is they allow systematic tracking.
And now first party cookies are starting to be used for that too. It's not that important how you specifically want to phrase the general ickiness of third party cookies.
That really doesn't answer the question. Munchberry claims these analytics tools have cross domain tracking and I'm asking how, precisely. In part because of professional interest, and in part because I don't actually think it's true.
You specifically got one detail wrong: it's not just for analytics tools. It's the adtech industry in general using this technique, and Adobe offers its analytics as part of its marketing software suite.
From their own site: "What is Adobe Experience Cloud? It's a collection of best-in-class solutions for marketing, analytics, advertising, and commerce."
You're right, Adobe Experience Cloud doesn't sell information, so how problematic you find the product depends on where you draw the line on privacy.
Specifically, Adobe Experience Cloud definitely offers retargeting capabilities (ads following you around the internet) and the ability to get statistics on the effectiveness of that advertising. If they're at parity with competing marketing suites, then they also have attribution capabilities to track you with per-user, per-interaction granularity.
A site that serves Adobe Experience Cloud cookies in the third-party-disguised-as-first-party way is likely enabling this capability for all marketers that are going through Adobe Experience Cloud. So the interesting question would be whether you, a visitor to Fox.com, consider being watched by marketers who aren't Fox.com to be a privacy problem.
All of the above is more private than eg google analytics because of the lack of cross domain tracking... I'd consider it a big improvement vis-a-vis google's product suite.
Third party, or third party disguised as first party, is only problematic because of an implied "there's very little keeping the third party from using your data for things that aren't just analytics for the first party." It's the red flag for "this site may not be using your data the way you would want it to."
Third party ad trackers disguised as first party cookies specifically violate the general assumption that first party data stays first party, because those third parties have specific mechanisms to track you across multiple first parties.