4 ms·
I would be surprised if they weren’t. Incognito mode is for cleaning up cookies and browser history, not actual privacy.
by thfuran 1y ago
I would be surprised if they weren’t. Incognito mode is for cleaning up cookies and browser history, not actual privacy.
- Lammy 1y agohttps://www.skeletonclaw.com/image/710734055173472257 https://www.skeletonclaw.com/image/710734055173472257
- user3939382 1y agoGoogle fully understands that users are reaching for incognito because they want their session to be 100% ephemeral they just don't care because they're paid to not care. Technical distinction between local and remote data is unrelated, Google could offer privacy if they wanted to.
- Almondsetat 1y agoGoogle has specifically created an entire page telling users exactly what to expect from incognito browsing: it's the first page that opens when you go incognito mode, every time
- Lammy 1y agoRelevant Scott McCloud Chrome comic: https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_22.html https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_22.html (2008)
- Jensson 1y agoDo you think browsers should send to the server that it is in incognito mode? Because that is what you are asking for, that would just reduce privacy not increase it.
- Dylan16807 1y agoThat's not the only way it could be done. But sure, sending that extra tidbit of information specifically to servers that they can verify won't track you would be a good tradeoff. Even worse is that they probably do try to detect if you're in an incognito session, but only for their benefit. Edit: Here's an easy thing they could do. Even if we accept or pretend to desire cross-browser correlation at all, new-seeming browser profiles could have their information siloed for a few days and if they disappear in that time it all gets treated as an incognito session.