TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Bing contract prohibits DuckDuckGo from completely blocking Microsoft tracking

462 pointsby etamponialmost 3 years ago

27 comments

yeggalmost 3 years ago
This title is very misleading (and really should be changed).<p>This is not about search. To be clear, when you load our search results, you are completely anonymous, including ads. For ads, we actually worked with Microsoft to make ad clicks privacy protected as well. From our public ads page, &quot;Microsoft Advertising does not associate your ad-click behavior with a user profile.&quot; This page is linked to next to every Microsoft ad that is served on our search engine (duckduckgo.com). <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.duckduckgo.com&#x2F;company&#x2F;ads-by-microsoft-on-duckduckgo-private-search&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.duckduckgo.com&#x2F;company&#x2F;ads-by-microsoft-on-duck...</a>.<p>In all our browsing apps (iOS&#x2F;Android&#x2F;Mac) we also block third-party cookies, including those from Microsoft-owned properties like LinkedIn and Bing. That is, the privacy thing most people talk about on the web (blocking 3rd party cookies) applies here to MSFT. We also have a lot of other web protections that also apply to MSFT-owned properties as well, e.g., GPC, first-party cookie expiration, fingerprinting protection, referrer header trimming, cookie consent handling, fire button data clearing, etc.<p>This is just about non-DuckDuckGo and non-Microsoft sites in our browsers, where our search syndication agreement currently prevents us from stopping Microsoft-owned scripts from loading, though we can still apply our browser&#x27;s protections post-load (like 3rd party cookie blocking and others mentioned above, and do). We&#x27;ve also been tirelessly working behind the scenes to change this limited restriction. I also understand this is confusing because it is a search syndication contract that is preventing us from doing a non-search thing. That&#x27;s because our product is a bundle of multiple privacy protections, and this is a distribution requirement imposed on us as part of the search syndication agreement. Our syndication agreement also has broad confidentially provisions and the requirement documents themselves are explicitly marked confidential.<p>Taking a step back, I know our product is not perfect and will never be. We face many constraints: platform constraints, contractual constraints (like in this case), breakage constraints, and the evolving tracking arms race. Holistically though I believe it is the best thing out there for mainstream users who want simple privacy protection without breaking things, and that is our product vision.<p>Overall our app is multi-pronged privacy protection in one package (private search, web protection, HTTPS upgrading, email protection, app tracking protection for Android, and more to come), being careful (and putting in a lot of effort) to not break things while still offering protections -- an &quot;easy button&quot; for privacy. And we constantly work to improve its capabilities and will continue to do so, including in this case. For example, we&#x27;ve recently been adding bespoke third-party protections for Google and Facebook, like Google AMP&#x2F;Topics&#x2F;FLEDGE protection and Facebook embedded content protection.
评论 #31491957 未加载
评论 #31492761 未加载
评论 #31494515 未加载
评论 #31492256 未加载
评论 #31493682 未加载
评论 #31496505 未加载
评论 #31493924 未加载
评论 #31491275 未加载
评论 #31491480 未加载
评论 #31491391 未加载
评论 #31494810 未加载
评论 #31541621 未加载
评论 #31498914 未加载
评论 #31524895 未加载
评论 #31493958 未加载
评论 #31492626 未加载
评论 #31491560 未加载
评论 #31492279 未加载
评论 #31492558 未加载
falcolasalmost 3 years ago
Just looking at the original title, I knew this was going to be a twitter post by a Brave employee posting either hearsay, or something taken out of context.<p>Private browsing is a small niche, and Brave does their best to drive competitors at every turn, and not by being obviously better at it. Kinda scummy, if I’m honest.
评论 #31492613 未加载
评论 #31496342 未加载
评论 #31492505 未加载
lapcatalmost 3 years ago
DuckDuckGo feels like just a front for Microsoft at this point. I once looked into buying search ads on DuckDuckGo, only to discover to my horror that DDG didn&#x27;t have its own ad business. DDG is entirely reliant on Microsoft&#x27;s advertising system. You have to sign up for a Microsoft account to even put ads on DDG! And it&#x27;s difficult — maybe impossible IIRC? — to specifically target DDG in those ads, without also targeting other MS properties.<p>Until DuckDuckGo separates itself from Microsoft and becomes truly independent, especially in its business model, you have to question why DDG even exists.<p>DDG was founded 14 years ago. I can understand initially bootstrapping on MS ads, but what&#x27;s the excuse now? How about separating yourself from Microsoft first, before making a web browser that gives special exemptions to Microsoft?
评论 #31506790 未加载
评论 #31497469 未加载
评论 #31494472 未加载
评论 #31492865 未加载
评论 #31492876 未加载
评论 #31493042 未加载
评论 #31492979 未加载
Imnimoalmost 3 years ago
So if I understand correctly, the problem is that in order to license its search index, MS requires a concession from DDG on its browser. From a customer&#x27;s standpoint, these are two separate products - you can use DDG search and not use DDG&#x27;s browser, or vice versa. It&#x27;s only because they&#x27;re made by the same company that MS has the leverage to demand this carve-out. It seems like the answer for customers is to just not use a browser made by DDG, thereby removing that leverage.
maverick74almost 3 years ago
@yegg<p>Well... how about stopping all this &quot;Bing on the background&quot; thing and do like Brave search and Qwant (which i&#x27;m testing as to switch away from ddg for a few months now - because of you relying in Bing) and start believing a bit more on your own index???<p>Why not start being a &quot;real&quot; search engine???<p>I would say it&#x27;s about time!!!<p>(If brave and qwant can do it, so can you - man... even Gigablast does it!!!)
评论 #31492631 未加载
BilalBudhanialmost 3 years ago
Sadly this remind me of the golden phrase<p>&gt; if you are not paying for the product then you are the product<p>I have switched to Kagi [0] a paid search engine (free in beta) as my default search engine and so far it has been working out great.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.kagi.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.kagi.com</a>
评论 #31497922 未加载
评论 #31497480 未加载
darksidespoonalmost 3 years ago
Sadly DDG can no longer be trusted for being shady.<p>A better option would have been to let the community decide. You could have easily posted something to the effect of &quot;One of the search engines wants us to sign an NDA and force us to allow more tracking than we are comfortable with&quot;<p>Then let the community decide if we wanted a branded browser that is less secure or even if enough folks didn&#x27;t care that you could still justify dev cycles on the browser.<p>No you took the shady approach and that is sad.
x32n23nralmost 3 years ago
Original audit thread:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;thezedwards&#x2F;status&#x2F;1528808759027331072" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;thezedwards&#x2F;status&#x2F;1528808759027331072</a>
torrentialtomalmost 3 years ago
I dropped DDG back in March when Weinberg disclosed that they were engaging in censorship and injecting bias into search results related to the Ukraine&#x2F;Russia conflict. Now that we see he&#x27;s sold his soul to MS for $$$, this further confirms my decision. I&#x27;m using Brave as my search engine now.
zerralmost 3 years ago
Ecosia is a bing front-end as well. I wonder if they a similar deal.
dutchblacksmithalmost 3 years ago
Well Yegg, I&#x27;ll keep on using DDG. As I have done for years.
rhimalmost 3 years ago
I did not know this privacy comparison between browsers. It was shared under the tweet: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;privacytests.org&#x2F;android.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;privacytests.org&#x2F;android.html</a>
buzzwordsalmost 3 years ago
So the first question I have is &quot;does tracking help provide better search results?&quot; The second question is, &quot;Can you run a profitable search engine without target ad revenues?&quot;
评论 #31491579 未加载
brandonjhgooglealmost 3 years ago
I use Firefox with the following add-ons: uBlock Origin, Smart Referer, Resist Fingerprinting, Decentraleyes, Cookie AutoDelete.<p>Microsoft aside, does the DuckDuckGo browser provide any privacy benefits over this setup? What keeps DDG users from switching to Firefox?
verisimialmost 3 years ago
I&#x27;m enjoying presearch!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.presearch.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.presearch.org&#x2F;</a><p>you can dive into google&#x2F;ddg&#x2F;etc&#x27;s searches on the left, but its pretty decent!
LeoPantheraalmost 3 years ago
Linked to in the Twitter thread was this site which I&#x27;ve never heard of, but is very interesting:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;privacytests.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;privacytests.org</a>
FollowingTheDaoalmost 3 years ago
Sorry, if your software disallows blocking MS trackers you are in no way orienting yourself towards privacy.
elforce002almost 3 years ago
DDG lost me when they said they were going to start &quot;curating&quot; search responses. Give me all unadulterated results with out any bias and let me decide what to do with it.
评论 #31491583 未加载
评论 #31493948 未加载
评论 #31492698 未加载
nonrandomstringalmost 3 years ago
&gt; Microsoft and DuckDuckGo have partnered<p>Those are the saddest 5 words I have read all week.<p>Et tu, Brute?<p>&quot;Partnered&quot; is not a word one uses in connection with convicted criminal monopolists with a history of bribery, intimidation and fraud.<p>I choose my words carefully - Microsoft are gangsters who would sell their own grandmothers for beer money. For DuckDuckGo to be associated with them is a disgrace.
评论 #31501825 未加载
vimacs2almost 3 years ago
Well, the writing was on the wall as soon as they started blocking &quot;Russian misinformation&quot; that DDG are trying to ape the general practices of other search engines. Now, even the privacy itself is a secondary concern. Thankfully, I&#x27;ve already switched to Brave search last month and will likely eventually set up a SearX instance for a long term solution free of control by a corporation.
tiahuraalmost 3 years ago
DDG seems to be following the path of Mozilla.
评论 #31492825 未加载
ta8645almost 3 years ago
DDG is starting to get bad press a fair bit these days. There was also a sizeable backlash against their weird Ukraine-war virtue signalling. Seems they&#x27;re not as single-mindedly focused on privacy for search users, as their initial mission statement suggested.
评论 #31491272 未加载
评论 #31491192 未加载
评论 #31491168 未加载
评论 #31491291 未加载
评论 #31493637 未加载
评论 #31492687 未加载
ErrrNoMatealmost 3 years ago
Browsers are walled gardens, it&#x27;s better not to use this one, especially as the company deals with other things which involve Microsoft. Any link to them means the privacy sell is a bit sketchy to me.
评论 #31492709 未加载
评论 #31492718 未加载
Astdalmost 3 years ago
DDG blocking Google to read encrypted e-mail from the application Eboks.
Astdalmost 3 years ago
Adobe is collecting data without user authentication on Android phones
Astdalmost 3 years ago
The Beta does the job blocking.
Astdalmost 3 years ago
The Beta does.