• DDG returning unasked for stuff

    From R.Wieser@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 10 09:40:57 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    Hello all,

    I'm normally using DuckDuckGo as my search-engine, and for a time now have noticed it returning, only on the first page and always at the bottom,
    results that have to do with my (supposed) location, even though I'm
    searching for technical information.

    Just now I seached for "win32 bagMRU records" (yes, Windows registry related :-) ), and got entries back like "postal codes in {city}", "Genealogy in
    {area} - Trace your {country} roots" and "List of cities, towns and villages
    in {area}", none of which seem to be even remotely related to any
    combination of the keywords I supplied.

    Does anyone have an idea what is going on here ? Mind you, the fact that these results are, as mentioned, only returned on the first page and at the bottom gives me the idea that its on purpose.

    But what is that purpose ? Just to try to be creepy by letting me know
    where they think I live ?

    And by the way: I can't remember having *ever* searched for anything related
    to those results.

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From VanguardLH@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 04:38:41 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:

    I'm normally using DuckDuckGo as my search-engine, and for a time now
    have noticed it returning, only on the first page and always at the
    bottom, results that have to do with my (supposed) location, even
    though I'm searching for technical information.

    Just now I seached for "win32 bagMRU records" (yes, Windows registry
    related >: -) ), and got entries back like "postal codes in {city}", "Genealogy in {area} - Trace your {country} roots" and "List of
    cities, towns and villages in {area}", none of which seem to be even
    remotely related to any combination of the keywords I supplied.

    Does anyone have an idea what is going on here ? Mind you, the fact
    that these results are, as mentioned, only returned on the first page
    and at the bottom gives me the idea that its on purpose.

    But what is that purpose ? Just to try to be creepy by letting me
    know where they think I live ?

    And by the way: I can't remember having *ever* searched for anything
    related to those results.

    In Firefox, which I configure to purge ALL locally cached data on its
    exit, and also disable its geolocation reporting (geo.enabled = false),
    I do not get the locale oriented search hits you mention at the bottom
    of the first page, or anywhere in the first page. Since I purge all
    locally cached data on exit, any cookies, site preferences, DOM Storage,
    and other data is gone after an exit.

    Perhaps you don't do a clean exit, so Firefox remembers some of that,
    like cookies for search settings you configured for use at ddg.com. One
    of the DDG search settings is Region. For me, it is "All regions".
    While I could set Advertisements to off, that won't stick since I don't
    keep any cookies or other local data on exit.

    DDG added its own AI Features. Other search engines added AI, too. I
    dislike the search engine attempting to present a panel in the search
    results page thinking its content is what I'm looking for. For example,
    when I use Google's search engine on "duckduckgo showing local search
    results geolocation disabled", it pukes out the following AI-built
    content before showing the regular search results:

    If DuckDuckGo is showing local search results even though geolocation
    is disabled, you can try these steps:

    * Check your device's location services: Make sure location services
    are enabled on your device. You can check this by:

    - Clicking the permissions icon in the address bar for Chrome,
    Firefox, or Brave

    - Opening the Safari menu and selecting Settings for DuckDuckGo

    * Restart your browser: Try restarting your web browser.

    * Improve the accuracy of your location: You can opt-in to improve the
    accuracy of your local search results by enabling location. This
    allows your browser to use techniques like WiFi databases, cell
    tower location databases, and GPS.

    * Clear your browser cookies: You can manually clear your browser
    cookies for duckduckgo.com.

    DuckDuckGo uses a GEO::IP lookup to guess your location by default.
    However, this process isn't always accurate.

    You can also change your DuckDuckGo settings via URL parameters by
    adding them after the search query. For example, you can use
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=search&kp=-1&kl=us-en.

    I'd try modifying the URL to append. I'm guessing "&kp=-1&kl=us-en" is
    what gets added to change geolocation prediction. The "Geo::IP" is just
    the old method of using the client's IP address to determine in whose IP
    pool it belongs, and getting its location just on the IP pool.

    https://metacpan.org/pod/Geo::IP

    However, by "DDG" it is unclear if you are using an unnamed web browser
    to visit there along with any add-ons you installed into it, or are
    using the DDG web browser as noted at:

    https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/get-duckduckgo/does-duckduckgo-make-a-browser/

    Well, sites have been using IP location for a very long time. While DDG
    might be collecting that data, that doesn't explain why DDG would start
    pushing search hits based on geolocation. Didn't happen for me.

    A recent update to Firefox (you didn't mention your web browser)
    modified the geolocation feature. If geo.enabled = true, now Firefox
    will provide geolocation to a site, but it is temporary. Once the tab
    is closed, the geo data is purged for that tab. See:

    https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/131.0/releasenotes/

    I set geo.enabled = true, but didn't care for my geolocation known while
    the tab remained open, so I went back to geo.enabled = false.

    I still prefer that *I* tell a site where I am when I decide to reveal
    that info. Well, other than a site getting IP geolocation using my IP
    address when I connect to their site. I would need to use a proxy, VPN,
    or Tor to mask my IP address, but I'm not that paranoid yet.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 07:55:33 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    On 10/10/2024 3:40 AM, R.Wieser wrote:
    Hello all,

    I'm normally using DuckDuckGo as my search-engine, and for a time now have noticed it returning, only on the first page and always at the bottom, results that have to do with my (supposed) location, even though I'm searching for technical information.

    Just now I seached for "win32 bagMRU records" (yes, Windows registry related :-) ), and got entries back like "postal codes in {city}", "Genealogy in {area} - Trace your {country} roots" and "List of cities, towns and villages in {area}", none of which seem to be even remotely related to any
    combination of the keywords I supplied.

    Does anyone have an idea what is going on here ? Mind you, the fact that these results are, as mentioned, only returned on the first page and at the bottom gives me the idea that its on purpose.

    But what is that purpose ? Just to try to be creepy by letting me know
    where they think I live ?

    And by the way: I can't remember having *ever* searched for anything related to those results.


    I've seen some results like that lately, off and on. It's
    startling to see the links suddenly switch to how I can
    find things related to my search in my town. I assume they're
    just making a few bucks that way, which is fine with me. It's
    not intrusive.

    I delete all cookies/cache etc on close and block
    tracking domains in HOSTS, so I know they're not tracking me.
    But they can get location from IP. Google does that regularly.
    I do it myself, with free MaxMind databas files that allow me to
    translate an IP to a location. I use that to process my website
    server logs. I load the data into an MSI file, then call it with
    a VBScript. Combined with a call to get hostname, it allows me
    to replace the IP address in my logs with
    hostname/city/state/country. In some cases ISPs even add
    the location to the hostname.

    You could bypass that with VPN if you care.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 13:47:52 2024
    On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 09:40:57 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote: >Hello all,
    I'm normally using DuckDuckGo as my search-engine, and for a time now have >noticed it returning, only on the first page and always at the bottom, >results that have to do with my (supposed) location, even though I'm >searching for technical information.
    Just now I seached for "win32 bagMRU records" (yes, Windows registry related >:-) ), and got entries back like "postal codes in {city}", "Genealogy in >{area} - Trace your {country} roots" and "List of cities, towns and villages >in {area}", none of which seem to be even remotely related to any
    combination of the keywords I supplied.
    Does anyone have an idea what is going on here ? Mind you, the fact that >these results are, as mentioned, only returned on the first page and at the >bottom gives me the idea that its on purpose.
    But what is that purpose ? Just to try to be creepy by letting me know
    where they think I live ?
    And by the way: I can't remember having *ever* searched for anything related >to those results.

    whatever web browser(s) you may be using, be sure to test it:

    (using Tor Browser 13.5.7)
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=browser+fingerprint+test
    ...
    https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
    Test your browser to see how well you are protected from tracking and >fingerprinting:
    TEST YOUR BROWSER
    https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/kcarter?aat=1
    Test with a real tracking company ?
    Our tests indicate that you have strong protection against Web tracking.
    ...
    How does tracking technology follow your trail around the web, even if
    you've taken protective measures? Cover Your Tracks shows you how trackers >see your browser. It provides you with an overview of your browser's most >unique and identifying characteristics.
    Only anonymous data will be collected through this site.
    Want to learn more about tracking? Read how it works with our guide:
    LEARN MORE ABOUT FINGERPRINTING
    https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/learn
    ...
    (cf. any browser using Omnimix' built-in Tor)
    Our tests indicate that you have strong protection against Web tracking.
    ...
    (cf. any browser not using Tor)
    Our tests indicate that you are not protected against tracking on the Web. [end quoted excerpts]

    (using Tor Browser 13.5.7)
    https://check.torproject.org/
    Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.
    Your IP address appears to be: ###.###.###.###
    ...
    (cf. any browser using Omnimix' built-in Tor)
    Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.
    Your IP address appears to be: ###.###.###.###
    However, it does not appear to be Tor Browser.
    Click here to go to the download page
    https://www.torproject.org/download/
    ...
    (cf. any browser not using Tor)
    Sorry. You are not using Tor.
    Your IP address appears to be: ###.###.###.###
    [end quoted excerpts]

    (using Tor Browser 13.5.7) >https://gitlab.torproject.org/legacy/trac/-/wikis/doc/TorPlusVPN
    TorPlusVPN
    Last edited by Alexander Faeroy 4 years ago
    TOC(depth=1)
    Introduction
    There are many discussions on the Tor Mailing list and spread over
    many forums about combining Tor with a VPN, SSH and/or a proxy in
    different variations. X in this article stands for, "either a VPN,
    SSH or proxy". All different ways to combine Tor with X have
    different pros and cons.
    General
    Anonymity and Privacy
    You can very well decrease your anonymity by using VPN/SSH in addition
    to Tor. (Proxies are covered in an extra chapter below.) If you know
    what you are doing you can increase anonymity, security and privacy.
    Most VPN/SSH provider log, there is a money trail, if you can't pay
    really anonymously. (An adversary is always going to probe the weakest
    link first...). A VPN/SSH acts either as a permanent entry or as a
    permanent exit node. This can introduce new risks while solving others.
    Who's your adversary? Against a global adversary with unlimited
    resources more hops make passive attacks (slightly) harder but active
    attacks easier as you are providing more attack surface and send out
    more data that can be used. Against colluding Tor nodes you are safer, >against blackhat hackers who target Tor client code you are safer
    (especially if Tor and VPN run on two different systems). If the VPN/
    SSH server is adversary controlled you weaken the protection provided
    by Tor. If the server is trustworthy you can increase the anonymity
    and/or privacy (depending on set up) provided by Tor.
    VPN/SSH can also be used to circumvent Tor censorship (on your end by
    the ISP or on the service end by blocking known tor exits).
    VPN/SSH versus Proxy
    The connection between you and the VPN/SSH is (in most cases, not all) >encrypted.
    On the other hand the connection between you and an OpenProxy is
    unencrypted. An 'SSL proxy' is in most cases only a http proxy which
    supports the connect method. The connect method was originally
    designed to allow you to use to connect using SSL to webservers but
    other fancy things such as connecting to IRC, SSH, etc. are possible
    as well. Another disadvantage of http(s) proxies is, that some of them, >depending on your network setup, even leak your IP through the 'http >forwarded for' header. (Such proxies are also so called 'non-anonymous >proxies'. While the word anonymous has to be understood with care
    anyway, a single OpenProxy is much worse than Tor).
    Also read Aren't 10 proxies (proxychains) better than Tor with only 3
    hops? - proxychains vs Tor.
    VPN versus SSH or Proxy
    VPN operates on network level. A SSH tunnel can offer a socks5 proxy.
    Proxies operate on application level. These technical details
    introduce their own challenges when combining them with Tor.
    The problematic thing with many VPN users is, the complicated setup.
    They connect to the VPN on a machine, which has direct access to the >internet.
    the VPN user may forget to connect to the VPN first
    without special precautions, when a VPN connection breaks down (VPN
    server reboot, network problems, VPN process crash, etc.), direct
    connections without VPN will be made.
    To fix this issue you can try something like VPN-Firewall.
    When operating on the application level (using SSH tunnel socks5 or
    proxies), the problem is that many applications do not honor the proxy >settings. Have a look into the Torify HOWTO to get an idea.
    The most secure solution to mitigate those issues is to use
    transparent proxying, which is possible for VPN, SSH and proxies.
    You -> X -> Tor
    Some people under some circumstances (country, provider) are forced to
    use a VPN or a proxy to connect to the internet. Other people want to
    do that for other reasons, which we will also discuss.
    You -> VPN/SSH -> Tor
    You can route Tor through VPN/SSH services. That might prevent your
    ISP etc from seeing that you're using Tor (VPN/SSH Fingerprinting
    below). On one hand, VPNs are more popular than Tor, so you won't
    stand out as much, on the other hand, in some countries replacing an >encrypted Tor connection with an encrypted VPN or SSH connection, will
    be suspicious as well. SSH tunnels are not so popular.
    Once the VPN client has connected, the VPN tunnel will be the
    machine's default Internet connection, and TBB (Tor Browser Bundle)
    (or Tor client) will route through it.
    This can be a fine idea, assuming your VPN/SSH provider's network is
    in fact sufficiently safer than your own network.
    Another advantage here is that it prevents Tor from seeing who you are
    behind the VPN/SSH. So if somebody does manage to break Tor and learn
    the IP address your traffic is coming from, but your VPN/SSH was
    actually following through on their promises (they won't watch, they
    won't remember, and they will somehow magically make it so nobody else
    is watching either), then you'll be better off.
    You -> Proxy -> Tor
    This does not prevent your ISP etc from seeing that you're using Tor
    because the connection between your and the proxy is not encrypted.
    Sometimes this prevents Tor from seeing who you are depending on the >configuration on the side of the proxy server. So if somebody does
    manage to break Tor and learn the IP address your traffic is coming
    from, but your proxy does not log an the attacker didn't see the
    unencrypted connection between your and the proxy, then you'll be
    better off.
    You -> Tor -> X
    This is generally a really poor plan.
    Some people do this to evade Tor bans in many places. (When Tor exit
    nodes are blacklisted by the remote server.)
    (Read first for understanding: How often does Tor change its paths?.) >Normally Tor switches frequently its path through the network. When
    you choose a permanent destination X, you give away this advantage,
    which may have serious repercussions for your anonymity.
    You -> Tor -> VPN/SSH
    You can also route VPN/SSH services through Tor. That hides and
    secures your Internet activity from Tor exit nodes. Although you are
    exposed to VPN/SSH exit nodes, you at least get to choose them. If
    you're using VPN/SSHs in this way, you'll want to pay for them
    anonymously (cash in the mail [beware of your fingerprint and printer >fingerprint], Liberty Reserve, well-laundered Bitcoin, etc).
    However, you can't readily do this without using virtual machines. And
    you'll need to use TCP mode for the VPNs (to route through Tor). In
    our experience, establishing VPN connections through Tor is chancy,
    and requires much tweaking.
    Even if you pay for them anonymously, you're making a bottleneck where
    all your traffic goes -- the VPN/SSH can build a profile of everything
    you do, and over time that will probably be really dangerous.
    You -> Tor -> Proxy
    You can also route proxy connections through Tor. That does not hide
    and secure your Internet activity from Tor exit nodes because the
    connection between the exit node to the proxy is not encrypted, not
    one, but two parties may log and manipulate your clear traffic now. If
    you're using proxies in this way, you'll want to pay for them
    anonymously (cash in the mail [beware of your fingerprint and printer >fingerprint], Liberty Reserve, well-laundered Bitcoin, etc) or use
    free proxies.
    One way to do that is proxychains. Another way would be to use a
    Transparent Proxy and then either proxify (set proxy settings) or
    socksify (use helper applications to force your application to use a
    proxy) the programs you want to chain inside your Transparent Proxy
    client machine.
    You -> X -> Tor -> X
    No research whether this is technically possible. Remember that this
    is likely a very poor plan because [#You-Tor-X you -> Tor -> X] is
    already a really poor plan.
    You -> your own (local) VPN server -> Tor
    This is different from above. You do not have to pay a VPN provider
    here as you host your own local VPN server. This won't protect you
    from your ISP of seeing you connect to Tor and this also won't
    protect you from spying Tor exit servers.
    This is done to enforce, that all your traffic routes through Tor
    without any leaks. Further read: TorVPN. If you want this, it may
    unnecessary to use VPN, a simple Tor-Gateway may be easier, for
    example Whonix.
    VPN/SSH Fingerprinting
    Using a VPN or SSH does not provide strong guarantees of hiding your
    the fact you are using Tor from your ISP. VPN's and SSH's are
    vulnerable to an attack called Website traffic fingerprinting ^1^. Very >briefly, it's a passive eavesdropping attack, although the adversary
    only watches encrypted traffic from the VPN or SSH, the adversary can
    still guess what website is being visited, because all websites have
    specific traffic patterns. The content of the transmission is still
    hidden, but to which website one connects to isn't secret anymore.
    There are multiple research papers on that topic. ^2^ Once the premise
    is accepted, that VPN's and SSH's can leak which website one is
    visiting with a high accuracy, it's not difficult to imagine, that
    also encrypted Tor traffic hidden by a VPN's or SSH's could be
    classified. There are no research papers on that topic.
    What about Proxy Fingerprinting? It has been said above already, that >connections to proxies are not encrypted, therefore this attack isn't
    even required against proxies, since proxies can not hide the fact,
    you're using Tor anyway.
    ,, ^1^ See Tor Browser Design for a general definition and
    introduction into Website traffic fingerprinting.
    ^2^ See slides for Touching from a Distance: Website Fingerprinting
    Attacks and Defenses. There is also a research paper from those
    authors. Unfortunately, it's not free. However, you can find free ones
    using search engines. Good search terms include "Website Fingerprinting
    VPN". You'll find multiple research papers on that topic.
    [end quote]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From R.Wieser@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 10 15:25:40 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    Newyana2,

    It's startling to see the links suddenly switch to how I can
    find things related to my search in my town.

    Yep.

    I assume they're just making a few bucks that way,

    In that case they are, as far as I'm concerned, advertisements, and should
    be marked as such. They aren't.

    I delete all cookies/cache etc on close

    Same here.

    and block tracking domains in HOSTS, so I know they're not
    tracking me.

    I'm doing something similar: blocking third-party domains.

    But they can get location from IP.

    I know. But why are they showing me that they can do that ? What is the purpose of it ? Mind you, the results have zero to do with my question,
    and are otherwise also of zero value to me.

    You could bypass that with VPN if you care.

    I know. But its not about how to evade the crap (there are a few options),
    but why I get them.


    .... Hmmm... I just realized that it /could/ have something to European rules that IIRC demand that the returned results contain some localized ones too, and this is how they make good on that rule. Useless crap at the wrong moment, but tecnically obeying the rule.

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 11:13:33 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    On Thu, 10/10/2024 9:25 AM, R.Wieser wrote:

    I know. But why are they showing me that they can do that ? What is the purpose of it ? Mind you, the results have zero to do with my question,
    and are otherwise also of zero value to me.

    Does cleaning cookies help at all ?

    You know, when any other site tries to track you.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From R.Wieser@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 10 18:31:52 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    Paul,

    Does cleaning cookies help at all ?

    What cookies ? :-)

    My browser (FF) is configured to reject all third-party cookies, and to
    discard the remainder when I close it.

    You know, when any other site tries to track you.

    Also, I block third-party resources (FF add-on). That means that spy/beacon pixels/other do not get requested/loaded either. JS has been disabled too.

    Are there any other "leaks" I should be aware of ?

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 13:02:12 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    On Thu, 10/10/2024 12:31 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
    Paul,

    Does cleaning cookies help at all ?

    What cookies ? :-)

    My browser (FF) is configured to reject all third-party cookies, and to discard the remainder when I close it.

    You know, when any other site tries to track you.

    Also, I block third-party resources (FF add-on). That means that spy/beacon pixels/other do not get requested/loaded either. JS has been disabled too.

    Are there any other "leaks" I should be aware of ?

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser



    I usually search for "+++" using Agent Ransack
    and remove toe DOM storage. The domain name is
    part of the string.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From R.Wieser@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 10 20:41:51 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    Paul,

    Are there any other "leaks" I should be aware of ?

    I usually search for "+++" using Agent Ransack
    and remove toe DOM storage. The domain name is
    part of the string.

    Ah yes, I forgot all about that one. AFAIK that is a JScript something
    (which I have disabled), but if you know and can tell me how its accesed otherwise than I would be much obliged (FF v52).

    I just checked about:config and noticed I still had "dom.storage.enabled"
    set to True. Though the "storage.sqlite" database* is .. as empty as it
    will ever be (512 bytes):

    * AFAIK that is where it goes, but if you have information otherwise I would like to hear that too.


    Any thoughts about the DDG localized results ?

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to R.Wieser on Thu Oct 10 17:44:16 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    On Thu, 10/10/2024 2:41 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
    Paul,

    Are there any other "leaks" I should be aware of ?

    I usually search for "+++" using Agent Ransack
    and remove toe DOM storage. The domain name is
    part of the string.

    Ah yes, I forgot all about that one. AFAIK that is a JScript something (which I have disabled), but if you know and can tell me how its accesed otherwise than I would be much obliged (FF v52).

    I just checked about:config and noticed I still had "dom.storage.enabled"
    set to True. Though the "storage.sqlite" database* is .. as empty as it
    will ever be (512 bytes):

    * AFAIK that is where it goes, but if you have information otherwise I would like to hear that too.


    Any thoughts about the DDG localized results ?

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    I didn't see any localized results here. But then, I do not DDG
    with any regularity.

    The thing is, if they want to shake your cage, all these companies
    know exactly where you are. Maybe usage of a VPN will erode that.

    If you search for Joes Pizza, the search result includes an item
    from your own town, not from a location half way around the world.
    Maybe if your browser is using DOH, it's worse (closer to a MITM attack). There's no DOH (DNS over HTTPS) in FF52. When FF52 looks up a site, it's
    the old fashioned (regular) DNS that is used.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From R.Wieser@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 11 09:19:52 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    Paul,

    I didn't see any localized results here. But then, I do not DDG
    with any regularity.

    I do not see it all the time, but often enough that it caught my attention.

    The thing is, if they want to shake your cage, all these companies
    know exactly where you are.

    I disagree. If that would be so I would not get "localized" results from
    the other side of my country.

    Maybe usage of a VPN will erode that.

    As long as you don't do any, as your below, localized searches. :-)

    If you search for Joes Pizza, the search result includes an item
    from your own town, not from a location half way around the world.

    :-) Are you /sure/ about that ? Nowerdays I get enough nonsensical/crap results that I would not want to make a bet on it. :-(

    But yes, doing localized searches is pretty-much giving your (general)
    location away. Though not any more than a location-from-IP lookup would do.

    There's no DOH (DNS over HTTPS) in FF52. When FF52 looks up a site,
    it's the old fashioned (regular) DNS that is used.

    That would be a problem related to tracking by the DNS provider (and perhaps
    by any-or-all servers the connection hops thru) and not DDG (or bing)
    itself.

    Also, as far as I can tell DoH is only usefull (to the user) when the
    requested domain is hosted on a multi-homed server*. If its on a
    single-homed server than its IP is as good as its domain name.

    * or going thru (D)DOS mitigation service. Which than becomes just another choke point which could do tracking. :-|


    But I see you, as I, have no information on why DDG would dump localized results in a search which has absolute zero to do with ones location.

    Regards,
    Rudy Wieser

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to ...winston on Fri Oct 11 07:47:56 2024
    XPost: alt.windows7.general

    On 10/11/2024 4:27 AM, ...winston wrote:
    Paul wrote:

    If you search for Joes Pizza, the search result includes an item
    from your own town, not from a location half way around the world.
    Maybe if your browser is using DOH, it's worse (closer to a MITM attack).
    There's no DOH (DNS over HTTPS) in FF52. When FF52 looks up a site, it's
    the old fashioned (regular) DNS that is used.

        Paul

    Didn't support for FF52 end for both standard and esr releases?
    Even SeaMonkey has the relevant FF60.x security fixes


    FF52 is the last supported on XP, which Rudy often uses.
    I used it myself until a few months ago. Moving to Win10,
    I was surprised to find that current FF really wasn't much better
    at rendering sites.

    Security? I long ago prioritized not having
    the GUI re-broken over whatever dubious value a FF security
    fix might offer. It's reached a point where FF releases are
    coming out at insane speed and things get broken regularly.


    I don't remember security fixes at 60. As I recall that's when
    they broke a lot of settings, like blocking auto-updates, and
    moved those into policies.json. Not an improvement at all. Rather
    it was an attempt to make FF appealing to corporate admins.
    I figure that security in a browser is 99% about limiting
    script. There will always be 0-days, but nearly all are script-
    related, and most are connected with remote networking
    functionality. Cut out the script and remoting, and the
    security problem is solved.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)