4 ms·

If you try opening that link it pretty much tells you what it is: > Any requests to this domain -- improving.duckduckgo.com -- are part of this anonymous expe

If you try opening that link it pretty much tells you what it is: > Any requests to this domain -- improving.duckduckgo.com -- are part of this anonymous experiment engine. You can learn more about how this technology works and how it was designed to protect your privacy here. Which then links to here (https://help.duckduckgo.com/privacy/atb/ https://help.duckduckgo.com/privacy/atb/), where it says: > Second, we measure engagement of specific events on the page (e.g. when a misspelling message is displayed, and when it is clicked). This allows us to run experiments where we can test different misspelling messages and use CTR (click through rate) to determine the message's efficacy. If you are looking at network requests, these are the ones going to the one-pixel image at improving.duckduckgo.com. These requests are anonymous and the information is used only by us to improve our products.

Nextgrid 5y ago
“Anonymous” is misleading because the user’s IP, user agent and browser fingerprint is also transmitted. All of these can be correlated with other requests including search queries themselves.
- rovr138 5y ago
  If that’s all the identifying data and it is discarded, then it’s anonymous. We don’t know they’re using it. We don’t know they’re not using it either. But the fact that it’s sent doesn’t mean it’s used.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >> “Anonymous” is misleading because the user’s IP, user agent and browser fingerprint is also transmitted. > If that’s all the identifying data and it is discarded, then it’s anonymous. So by that standard google analytics is also "anonymous"?
  - calsy 5y ago
    The fact client data is being sent is enough reason to believe they are using it, regardless of unknown internal workings of the business. I don't think benefit of the doubt should apply to privacy or security with companies operating on the net. We know how they make their money and offer 'free services'.
rupertfupert 5y ago
Thank you for the hint, now I am a bit embarrassed that I didn't try to visit the subdomain myself. I am still worried about it somehow, because in my opinion the most privacy preserving way would be not to fetch that data at all. Now it seems to be down to trust. And the modern web did a good job for me to trust no one anymore. I also don't understand why the element has to 'carry' to the visited site and how that is possible.
- technobabbler 5y ago
  Most web trackers work similarly. When a user clicks on something important, a signal is sent via another request to a monitoring server, usually Google Analytics/Ads/A-B testing or something like it. In this case DDG just made their own tracker. But yes, it's entirely an exercise in trust. There is nothing stopping them from being nefarious with this collected information, except their brand. Someday they may sell out, or maybe they already have, who knows? Thing is, nobody has your best interests at heart. These are all profit-driven enterprises and everyone has their price. DDG just markets itself as less evil. You don't want to trust anyone? Then don't. Block the trackers, rotate through VPNs, always use incognito, etc. Or just accept it as a cost of searching and move on with your life... your profile is just going to be one of millions anyway, even if they do track you. At least they don't have the cross-product integration and remarketing that Google's billions can buy. At the end of the day search is an expensive endeavor requiring constant spidering and curating and anti-spam efforts. If you get it for free, you're the product. DDG isn't magically above the economics.
- btdmaster 5y ago
  Try Searx: https://github.com/searx/searx https://github.com/searx/searx https://searx.space/ https://searx.space/
- mescaline 5y ago
  It's my opinion privacy is a practice variously conducted by individuals. When someone says, "I don't have anything to hide", they are indicating they are OK with others knowing what they are doing (or they are ignorant of what can be done with that info). They choose to expose any data they input while online because they believe they are "above" judgment for those activities. On the other hand, those of us who do know what can be done with that info choose another path which is not about self judgement of our online actions. We are aware that data can be used in various ways to analyze our behaviors or the things we are searching and finding. Depending on the services that we use, we may be "targeted" with relevant ads, emails, or other changes in behavior by the sites we visit. Preserving privacy on an individual level is about using services or applications which we understand AND can control. Trust is lost when we don't understand applications properly or control how they react later on. Any service or application, which is not self hosted, should allow users to configure or DELETE information which has been sent or gathered by the user. That site or application should also have a clear revenue model and privacy policy that indicates the site or application owner will not change the model or behaviors unless the user has been contacted properly. Personally, I am 100% OK using an application that allows me to modify or delete the information it collects while I'm using it. It's when applications aren't set up to do this that I become worried and lose trust. It's my opinion that privacy is NOT a practice conducted by public concensus, because each individual (whose privacy is in question) retains the right to feel however they like about privacy.

Nextgrid 5y ago

“Anonymous” is misleading because the user’s IP, user agent and browser fingerprint is also transmitted. All of these can be correlated with other requests including search queries themselves.

rovr138 5y ago
If that’s all the identifying data and it is discarded, then it’s anonymous. We don’t know they’re using it. We don’t know they’re not using it either. But the fact that it’s sent doesn’t mean it’s used.
- gruez 5y ago
  >> “Anonymous” is misleading because the user’s IP, user agent and browser fingerprint is also transmitted. > If that’s all the identifying data and it is discarded, then it’s anonymous. So by that standard google analytics is also "anonymous"?
- calsy 5y ago
  The fact client data is being sent is enough reason to believe they are using it, regardless of unknown internal workings of the business. I don't think benefit of the doubt should apply to privacy or security with companies operating on the net. We know how they make their money and offer 'free services'.

rupertfupert 5y ago

Thank you for the hint, now I am a bit embarrassed that I didn't try to visit the subdomain myself. I am still worried about it somehow, because in my opinion the most privacy preserving way would be not to fetch that data at all. Now it seems to be down to trust. And the modern web did a good job for me to trust no one anymore. I also don't understand why the element has to 'carry' to the visited site and how that is possible.

technobabbler 5y ago
Most web trackers work similarly. When a user clicks on something important, a signal is sent via another request to a monitoring server, usually Google Analytics/Ads/A-B testing or something like it. In this case DDG just made their own tracker. But yes, it's entirely an exercise in trust. There is nothing stopping them from being nefarious with this collected information, except their brand. Someday they may sell out, or maybe they already have, who knows? Thing is, nobody has your best interests at heart. These are all profit-driven enterprises and everyone has their price. DDG just markets itself as less evil. You don't want to trust anyone? Then don't. Block the trackers, rotate through VPNs, always use incognito, etc. Or just accept it as a cost of searching and move on with your life... your profile is just going to be one of millions anyway, even if they do track you. At least they don't have the cross-product integration and remarketing that Google's billions can buy. At the end of the day search is an expensive endeavor requiring constant spidering and curating and anti-spam efforts. If you get it for free, you're the product. DDG isn't magically above the economics.
btdmaster 5y ago
Try Searx: https://github.com/searx/searx https://github.com/searx/searx https://searx.space/ https://searx.space/
mescaline 5y ago
It's my opinion privacy is a practice variously conducted by individuals. When someone says, "I don't have anything to hide", they are indicating they are OK with others knowing what they are doing (or they are ignorant of what can be done with that info). They choose to expose any data they input while online because they believe they are "above" judgment for those activities. On the other hand, those of us who do know what can be done with that info choose another path which is not about self judgement of our online actions. We are aware that data can be used in various ways to analyze our behaviors or the things we are searching and finding. Depending on the services that we use, we may be "targeted" with relevant ads, emails, or other changes in behavior by the sites we visit. Preserving privacy on an individual level is about using services or applications which we understand AND can control. Trust is lost when we don't understand applications properly or control how they react later on. Any service or application, which is not self hosted, should allow users to configure or DELETE information which has been sent or gathered by the user. That site or application should also have a clear revenue model and privacy policy that indicates the site or application owner will not change the model or behaviors unless the user has been contacted properly. Personally, I am 100% OK using an application that allows me to modify or delete the information it collects while I'm using it. It's when applications aren't set up to do this that I become worried and lose trust. It's my opinion that privacy is NOT a practice conducted by public concensus, because each individual (whose privacy is in question) retains the right to feel however they like about privacy.