Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't Google redirect through an interstitial page that's always over HTTP, so you do get a referrer that says the traffic came from them?
Yes, they do. But they are cutting out the keyword intentionally. There is no technical need to hide the keyword from website owners.
Remarkable coincidence 1: There still is a keyword in the referrer for AdWords customers.
Remarkable coincidence 2: There is a new _charged_ product called "Google Analytics Premium" that promises "more data, features and dedicated support". Shame upon him who thinks evil upon it.
Hmmm, I installed the Undirect Chrome extension because I got tired of the delay this causes ( https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/dohbiijnjeiejifbgf... ); I guess I have to choose between Google knowing which search result I clicked or the webmaster having the keyword in the referrer!
This is actually up to the client. In Firefox about:config, network.http.sendSecureXSiteReferrer is set to true by default, so it does send it, but you can turn it off.
I don't know of such a section, there is simply a section on Referer[sic] request-headers [0], at large. HTTP -> HTTP and HTTPS -> HTTPS are implied, if the only stated consideration is HTTPS -> HTTP referrals. HTTPS -> HTTPS Referer works on Google Search, which is usually of the most concern.
This has nothing to do with security. Removing the referrer information puts Google in the position to use (sell?) this information exclusively.
While Google is collecting more and more data about users Mozilla calls it an "improvement" to keep away referrer information from website owners. This is ridiculous.
So Mozilla get's its money from Google and in return they do what Google tells them.
I see your point, but Mozilla is in an impossible position.
Encrypting people's search is a good idea. Mozilla should do this, and as others in this thread have pointed out, they could be chastised for not having done it.
The fault is Google's who tamper with the referrer data intentionally to obscure the keyword data. They do this for the users 'privacy', but then you can still get the data if you're a paying Adwords customer. I have trouble reconciling 'privacy' and 'you can buy it'.
> I have trouble reconciling 'privacy' and 'you can buy it'.
I'm not sure, but I would assume that the idea is that data from Adwords, etc. is more anonymised. You can't build a system that tracks peoples searches across visits (using cookies).
It could already provably handle the load of millions of Chrome users (cf. SPDY: https).
And it's not like it's totally separate from their normal http infrastructure, which could also already provably handle the load of billions of searches.
Edit -- From the article: "Additionally, using HTTPS helps providers like Google remove information from the referrer string."