The pessimist in me thinks that if a browser were to disallow third party cookies, users might simply switch to a different browser that does allow them.
— Essentially off: Challenges only the most grievous offenders
— Low: Challenges only the most threatening visitors
— Medium: Challenges both moderate threat visitors and the most threatening visitors
— High: Challenges all visitors that have exhibited threatening behavior within the last 14 days
— I’m Under Attack!: Should only be used if your website is under a DDoS attack (Visitors will receive an interstitial page while we analyze their traffic and behavior to make sure they are a legitimate human visitor trying to access your website)
I think a lot of companies set it to "High" and forget about it, not realizing that it's ruining the experience for a lot of users.
[1]: https://www.cloudflare.com/a/firewall/ebelinski.com#security...
It's very good at blocking malicious traffic though and it's totally worth losing a pair of users for that.
That needs to bring everybody to the same table, Firefox will not do that alone and Google Chrome is not there for nothing.
Basically, Google must accept the proposal of disabling third-party cookies by default which will effect their income negatively, so they may just refuse to implement that feature for Chrome and even may prevent that feature from become a standard.
Sad.
Kinda hard to find though.