Comment: DuckDuckgo Browser Allows Microsoft Trackers Due To Search Agreement

Following the news that: 

DuckDuckGo browser allows Microsoft trackers due to the search agreement

[U] DuckDuckGo Working with Microsoft Concerning Browser Privacy – The Mac Observer

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
4 Expert Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Professor John Walker
Professor John Walker , Visiting Professor
InfoSec Expert
May 29, 2022 9:22 am

Very sorry to here this. That is the top of the blade that demonstrates that DuckFoGo have sold out to the Commercial  world. It is now deleted from my platforms as a trusted product. 

Last edited 1 month ago by Professor John Walker
Chris Hauk
Chris Hauk , Consumer Privacy Champion
InfoSec Expert
May 26, 2022 1:05 pm

It saddens me that a search engine we thought was private, DuckDuckGo, actually allows trackers for Microsoft search results. While DuckDuckGo didn\’t hide this fact, they also did not go to any lengths to let users know about the tracking, which makes users feel let down and mistrusting of DuckDuckGo.

I recommend that DuckDuckGo users perhaps migrate to another \”private\” browser and search engine until DuckDuckGo takes steps to fix this. Perhaps the Brave browser is the solution. As far as I can tell, Brave doesn\’t allow tracking by Microsoft or other nosy types, and doesn\’t use Microsoft\’s Bing or other major search engines, instead it has developed its own.\”

Pixel Privacy – Learn How to Protect Your Online Privacy The Easy Way!

Last edited 1 month ago by Chris Hauk
Paul Bischoff
Paul Bischoff , Privacy Advocate
InfoSec Expert
May 26, 2022 1:08 pm

It saddens me that a search engine we thought was private, DuckDuckGo, actually allows trackers for Microsoft search results. While DuckDuckGo didn\’t hide this fact, they also did not go to any lengths to let users know about the tracking, which makes users feel let down and mistrusting of DuckDuckGo.

I recommend that DuckDuckGo users perhaps migrate to another \”private\” browser and search engine until DuckDuckGo takes steps to fix this. Perhaps the Brave browser is the solution. As far as I can tell, Brave doesn\’t allow tracking by Microsoft or other nosy types, and doesn\’t use Microsoft\’s Bing or other major search engines, instead it has developed its own.

Last edited 1 month ago by Paul Bischoff
Cillian Kieran
Cillian Kieran , CEO and Founder
InfoSec Expert
May 31, 2022 5:19 am

 The DuckDuckGo disclosure is an opportunity to reflect, for individuals and companies alike. As an individual, who defines what privacy means to you? As an organization, is your internal definition of \”user privacy\” consistent with what your users expect? The DuckDuckGo disclosure is a consequence of a deeper issue: right now in most of the United States, our definitions of privacy—when it is respected, when it is violated—largely come from companies who stand to profit from their proprietary notions of privacy. The disclosure is a potent call for comprehensive consumer privacy legislation, as a means to codify privacy rules via a public institution rather than a business that is tiself playing the game.
The variation in privacy definitions is understandable, particularly given the lack of comprehensive consumer privacy law in the U.S. Instead of a public institution determining what constitutes a privacy right or a privacy violation, the most vocal arbiters of privacy are companies that are selling their own notions of privacy for profit.
One way to make transparency more than a statement is by supporting the development of open-source software. That is, software projects with source code that anyone can review, collaborate on, and distribute. Open-source software is key to developing fair and privacy-respecting technologies, for several reasons. Any developer can inspect the actual code defining data flows and privacy standards. Developers can also collaborate openly to workshop and refine privacy standards. With the mindset of \”Trust, but verify,\” people outside of a software company don\’t have to take that company\’s word that they\’re following the rules; the outside observers can see for themselves.
In addition to implementing approaches like open-source software development, companies must consider their own communications with respect to the current privacy vacuum in the U.S. Developing tools or products with any mention of \”privacy\” means that the stakes are high. Calling yourself a privacy champion is an invitation for users to deeply trust what you offer. Users develop high standards, and there is the visceral backlash as I\’ve observed in the hours since the disclosure. For those of us that are building privacy technologies—whether your customers are people or businesses—we need to recognize the responsibility that comes with branding ourselves \”privacy\” companies. Humans are trusting you to do what you say and—importantly—to not do what you don\’t say. Tucking data practices into legalese does not protect you from real reputational damage.
Privacy challenges are technical, legislative, and cultural. Our privacy solutions need to be similarly interdisciplinary. This can look like developing open-source privacy tools, fostering norms where independent audits of technology are healthy and welcome, and enacting comprehensive federal privacy legislation in the U.S.

Last edited 1 month ago by Cillian Kieran
Information Security Buzz
4
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x