7 ms·

I‘m pretty sure it was always just a proxy for bing. Just stripping away the Microsoft tracking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925 https://news.yco

I‘m pretty sure it was always just a proxy for bing. Just stripping away the Microsoft tracking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925

rvnx 2y ago
If you use Bing: You have "only" Microsoft Bing tracking you If you use DuckDuckGo: Now, you have "Yahoo Ads" instead of Microsoft Ads, but these ads, they are in fact Microsoft Ads, except sold via Yahoo. In front of these Yahoo Ads, DuckDuckGo actually adds its own click-through tracker. Now you have DDG, Yahoo and Microsoft tracking you. Bonus point if you click on an Amazon affiliate link, because in that case, the Amazon affiliate (DuckDuckGo) knows item-per-item what you purchased.
- dazc 2y ago
  Good reason not to use amazon then.
- Springtime 2y ago
  There's a setting in DDG to disable ads. I'm aware of the Amazon affiliate link URL addition but since I don't buy anything from Amazon it doesn't concern me personally. Either way everyone can benefit from running a content blocker (I'd be surprised if anyone from this audience wasn't).
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  that kagi couples plan feeling better and better
- roenxi 2y ago
  If you use a search product then someone is going to have your search history and it'll more-than-likely be provided to law enforcement in your country who are the #1 threat to you [0]. It'll also be sent to some sort of data centre for tracking and whatever commercial uses that tracking is good for. I've never understood how that would be a threat, but if you don't like it it comes almost baked in to the business model. You can't stop them sharing data, so they will probably do it for money. The sell is more that the data MS/DDG has is hopefully going to be siloed away from Google and so it is getting more expensive for an given entity to cross-reference information about you. And if we're lucky competitive pressure will peel DDG away from MS sooner or later if they get larger. [0] This logic does lead to an argument for a fair chunk of HNs readership to use Yandex, because they are hosted in a country that is effectively at war with the English-speaking world but not presently targeting English speakers.
  - fattegourmet 2y ago
    your [0] is just silly. If a person is at risk from their state's law enforcement, handing over their search data to yandex just makes it easier for Russia to convert them into spying/sabotage activities through, e.g., extortion. As you have noted, Russia is at war with the ~English-speaking world~ West, so it is much more likely to use this data against the users than in the past.
    - roenxi 2y ago
      But in your example the person involved would rather cooperate with the Russian authorities than turn their data over to local law enforcement. So it clearly makes sense to this hypothetical individual. Besides, it'd be a struggle for the Russians to even figure out who they are. They'd only have search data. That is powerful but probably not enough in many cases.
  - rustcleaner 2y ago
    Install Qubes OS, Create disposable template for the browser with deleted browser dot-folder with no network, (Optional) create appvm qube (or disposable template + disposable) for ProtonVPN or Mullvad Create named disposable qube utilising the disposable template for the browser, and either sys-whonix or your VPN qube for network, and enjoy the most anonymous internet you will ever get!
- sharpshadow 2y ago
  This makes sense, I was sceptical with the fast pace DDG had in the search market.
niutech 2y ago
DDG was once caught red-handed of tracking for Microsoft: https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-blocking-limit/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-blo...
- Springtime 2y ago
  That's a strange characterization of it. They weren't tracking for MS, their branded mobile browser (distinct from their site) was found to have an exclusion in its built-in content blocker for Microsoft-run tracking scripts in ads. Or put another way, if their browser had no content blocker (like the stock browsers of any mobile OS), their browser would be behaving like all the others. The scrutiny came from the conspicuous exclusion, given their arrangement with Bing (much like the controversy of Adblock Plus many years ago).
  - tombert 2y ago
    I don't think the parent's comment was that strange of a way of characterizing it. Yes, they block other tracking scripts, but since they have an explicit exception for tracking from Microsoft, it's not a complete stretch to say they were "tracking for MS"; I know technically it's Microsoft doing the tracking, but DDG gives them explicit permission to do so. I think that it's a distinction without much of a difference, and I don't think it's unfair to extrapolate a bit. If they're being misleading about the types of tracking in their mobile app to make Daddy Microsoft happy, why the fuck would I believe their claims that their search engine (which is more or less a proxy for Bing) would be immune from it? It actually really upset me; I was a big user and advocate of the DDG browser on iOS and Android, but when that news came out it felt like a big betrayal. I haven't used any DDG product since then, and while I have no idea what kind of trackers they block (if any), I just use Firefox Focus now with Kagi search.
    - Springtime 2y ago
      >why the fuck would I believe their claims that their search engine (which is more or less a proxy for Bing) would be immune from it? The context of the news was a security researcher conducting an audit of the app. If DDG were, as the GP claimed, performing tracking on behalf of MS then it would be more concerning since there is a difference between performing tracking on behalf of a third-party company and merely excluding them from being blocked via a content blocker that most mobile browsers lack anyway. A mobile app has much more freedom to do what it likes so if this was the worst that occurred in an audit I'm not of the opinion this mark against them is enough to change my use of them. Many things carry some compromise so one has to weigh if an alternative is better. Use of Firefox by default has Mozilla tracking (hence why some mobile forks exists, including one I use), analytics for sponsored links, non-disableable domain name auto-completion by partners, while use of Kagi search is directly tied to an IRL identity via payment. For me, I'm comfortable using uBlock Origin on both Desktop and Mobile (via a Firefox fork) unless more egregious facts present themselves.

I‘m pretty sure it was always just a proxy for bing. Just stripping away the Microsoft tracking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925

rvnx 2y ago

If you use Bing: You have "only" Microsoft Bing tracking you If you use DuckDuckGo: Now, you have "Yahoo Ads" instead of Microsoft Ads, but these ads, they are in fact Microsoft Ads, except sold via Yahoo. In front of these Yahoo Ads, DuckDuckGo actually adds its own click-through tracker. Now you have DDG, Yahoo and Microsoft tracking you. Bonus point if you click on an Amazon affiliate link, because in that case, the Amazon affiliate (DuckDuckGo) knows item-per-item what you purchased.

dazc 2y ago
Good reason not to use amazon then.
Springtime 2y ago
There's a setting in DDG to disable ads. I'm aware of the Amazon affiliate link URL addition but since I don't buy anything from Amazon it doesn't concern me personally. Either way everyone can benefit from running a content blocker (I'd be surprised if anyone from this audience wasn't).
Brian_K_White 2y ago
that kagi couples plan feeling better and better
roenxi 2y ago
If you use a search product then someone is going to have your search history and it'll more-than-likely be provided to law enforcement in your country who are the #1 threat to you [0]. It'll also be sent to some sort of data centre for tracking and whatever commercial uses that tracking is good for. I've never understood how that would be a threat, but if you don't like it it comes almost baked in to the business model. You can't stop them sharing data, so they will probably do it for money. The sell is more that the data MS/DDG has is hopefully going to be siloed away from Google and so it is getting more expensive for an given entity to cross-reference information about you. And if we're lucky competitive pressure will peel DDG away from MS sooner or later if they get larger. [0] This logic does lead to an argument for a fair chunk of HNs readership to use Yandex, because they are hosted in a country that is effectively at war with the English-speaking world but not presently targeting English speakers.
- fattegourmet 2y ago
  your [0] is just silly. If a person is at risk from their state's law enforcement, handing over their search data to yandex just makes it easier for Russia to convert them into spying/sabotage activities through, e.g., extortion. As you have noted, Russia is at war with the ~English-speaking world~ West, so it is much more likely to use this data against the users than in the past.
  - roenxi 2y ago
    But in your example the person involved would rather cooperate with the Russian authorities than turn their data over to local law enforcement. So it clearly makes sense to this hypothetical individual. Besides, it'd be a struggle for the Russians to even figure out who they are. They'd only have search data. That is powerful but probably not enough in many cases.
- rustcleaner 2y ago
  Install Qubes OS, Create disposable template for the browser with deleted browser dot-folder with no network, (Optional) create appvm qube (or disposable template + disposable) for ProtonVPN or Mullvad Create named disposable qube utilising the disposable template for the browser, and either sys-whonix or your VPN qube for network, and enjoy the most anonymous internet you will ever get!
sharpshadow 2y ago
This makes sense, I was sceptical with the fast pace DDG had in the search market.

niutech 2y ago

DDG was once caught red-handed of tracking for Microsoft: https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-blocking-limit/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-blo...

Springtime 2y ago
That's a strange characterization of it. They weren't tracking for MS, their branded mobile browser (distinct from their site) was found to have an exclusion in its built-in content blocker for Microsoft-run tracking scripts in ads. Or put another way, if their browser had no content blocker (like the stock browsers of any mobile OS), their browser would be behaving like all the others. The scrutiny came from the conspicuous exclusion, given their arrangement with Bing (much like the controversy of Adblock Plus many years ago).
- tombert 2y ago
  I don't think the parent's comment was that strange of a way of characterizing it. Yes, they block other tracking scripts, but since they have an explicit exception for tracking from Microsoft, it's not a complete stretch to say they were "tracking for MS"; I know technically it's Microsoft doing the tracking, but DDG gives them explicit permission to do so. I think that it's a distinction without much of a difference, and I don't think it's unfair to extrapolate a bit. If they're being misleading about the types of tracking in their mobile app to make Daddy Microsoft happy, why the fuck would I believe their claims that their search engine (which is more or less a proxy for Bing) would be immune from it? It actually really upset me; I was a big user and advocate of the DDG browser on iOS and Android, but when that news came out it felt like a big betrayal. I haven't used any DDG product since then, and while I have no idea what kind of trackers they block (if any), I just use Firefox Focus now with Kagi search.
  - Springtime 2y ago
    >why the fuck would I believe their claims that their search engine (which is more or less a proxy for Bing) would be immune from it? The context of the news was a security researcher conducting an audit of the app. If DDG were, as the GP claimed, performing tracking on behalf of MS then it would be more concerning since there is a difference between performing tracking on behalf of a third-party company and merely excluding them from being blocked via a content blocker that most mobile browsers lack anyway. A mobile app has much more freedom to do what it likes so if this was the worst that occurred in an audit I'm not of the opinion this mark against them is enough to change my use of them. Many things carry some compromise so one has to weigh if an alternative is better. Use of Firefox by default has Mozilla tracking (hence why some mobile forks exists, including one I use), analytics for sponsored links, non-disableable domain name auto-completion by partners, while use of Kagi search is directly tied to an IRL identity via payment. For me, I'm comfortable using uBlock Origin on both Desktop and Mobile (via a Firefox fork) unless more egregious facts present themselves.