If you’ve ever wondered why, after years of privacy regulation and user complaints, we still see cookie banners on almost every website, you’re not alone. Many privacy advocates and developers have proposed a simple fix: let browsers handle cookie consent. Imagine a world where you could set your privacy preferences once in your browser, and every site would automatically know—and respect—your choice.
While this sounds like a privacy utopia, the reality is much more complex. Implementing a browser-level consent API faces massive legal, technical, and business challenges. In this article, we’ll explore why browsers haven’t standardised cookie consent, why website interests don’t always align with user privacy, and how even browser makers like Google Chrome have conflicting incentives.
Fragmented Standards and Misaligned Interests
One of the main obstacles to a universal browser privacy API is the sheer variety of privacy regulations around the world. The GDPR in Europe, CCPA in California, and other laws in Brazil, India, and beyond all have unique definitions and rules around consent. Some require explicit opt-in for tracking, while others allow opt-out. There’s no single global standard for cookie categories like “analytics,” “personalisation,” or “advertising.”
But the challenge isn’t just regulatory. Websites have a strong incentive to persuade users to consent to tracking and cookies. More consent means more data, which often translates to more ad revenue. That’s why many websites use persuasive banners or even “dark patterns” to nudge users to click “Accept.”
This creates misaligned interests:
Browsers should, in theory, put the user in control—allowing a single, easy way to say “no” to tracking everywhere.
Websites, on the other hand, want the freedom to re-ask for consent and persuade users to opt in, maximising their data collection and profits.
Browser makers themselves aren’t always neutral. For example, Chrome is developed by Google, whose business model is deeply tied to advertising and user tracking. This conflict of interest means that, even if Chrome could easily enforce universal cookie preferences, it may be incentivised to give users more ways to “consent” for the sake of its own ad revenue.
Real-World Example: Despite years of privacy discussions, Chrome has repeatedly delayed the removal of third-party cookies—citing technical and ecosystem reasons, but also arguably to protect the advertising business that drives much of Google’s profit.
Backwards Compatibility: The Web’s Double-Edged Sword
One reason the web is so resilient is its backwards compatibility. Websites built 20 or even 30 years ago (unless made with now-defunct technologies like Flash) still work today in modern browsers. This is great for longevity and access, but it also means that introducing new standards is very difficult.
A universal browser-level consent API would require not only new sites but also millions of legacy websites—built on different tech stacks and often never updated—to recognise and implement the API. Many sites simply won’t, leading to inconsistent user experiences and undermining the whole effort.
Example: A small blog launched in 2002, never updated since, will still load in Chrome or Firefox today—with no concept of consent APIs or modern privacy controls.
Legal and Regulatory Liability
Current privacy laws place the responsibility for collecting and honouring user consent firmly on the website owner. If something goes wrong—if a site ignores the user’s preferences or mishandles consent—the site, not the browser vendor, is legally on the hook.
This makes website owners wary of relying solely on browser signals. There’s a fear that a technical glitch or a misunderstood API could expose them to significant fines, especially under strict regimes like the GDPR.
On top of this, websites want control over how they request consent. Custom banners let them tailor the message, offer context, and, crucially, try to persuade users to opt in.
User Experience and Granularity
Cookie banners may be annoying, but they often provide important context, explaining why a site wants to use cookies or how data is processed. A browser-level API, by contrast, would struggle to give site-specific explanations or let users make granular, per-site choices.
Some users may want to support their favourite news site by consenting to tracking there, but block cookies on other sites. Universal browser settings can oversimplify these preferences, leading to frustration or missed opportunities for websites to build trust.
Technical and Adoption Challenges
For a browser-level consent API to work, both browsers and websites need to adopt it. Previous efforts, like the "Do Not Track" (DNT) setting, failed largely because websites simply ignored it. Even newer efforts like Global Privacy Control (GPC) have had limited uptake, in part due to lack of regulatory clarity and industry buy-in.
Conclusion
While the idea of a universal browser cookie consent API sounds like the perfect solution, the reality is full of tough challenges:
Fragmented global standards and competing interests
Websites’ drive to persuade users to opt in
Browser makers’ own business incentives (see Chrome and third-party cookies)
Backwards compatibility of the web, making broad adoption difficult
Legal accountability and technical barriers
Until regulators, browsers, and the websites themselves align their interests, cookie banners—however imperfect—are here to stay.