

'Google Referrer Header Privacy Litigation' Settlement - zaroth
http://www.googlesearchsettlement.com/hc/en-us/articles/202372170-Proposed-Cy-Pres-Recipients-and-Allocations

======
zaroth
"Google will pay $8.5 million to fund organizations and particular initiatives
focused on Internet privacy, as well as to cover lawyers’ fees and costs and
other expenses related to the Settlement. Google will also revise its "FAQs,"
"Key Terms" and About Google Web History" webpages to include conspicuous,
clear and concise explanations of how and when search queries may be disclosed
to third parties via referrer headers."

Just to be clear, Google is being sued for operating a standards compliant web
server?

But one interesting thing about that wording, about how Google must disclose
how and when search queries may be disclosed to third parties... _via referrer
headers. " Emphasis added. Why make it referrer header specific? The legal
claim can't rely on an implementation detail like the header property name,
right?

I want to know how my search terms are being disclosed. I think, if you're
going to use it commercially, you have to, at least, _disclose* how you're
using it. Particularly if they are in any way tied to my identity.

This is, I think, the primary value-add of DDG. At least, it is a
differentiator for them I'm sure. Collect less data, leave a smaller
footprint. In many ways, since they are the default search engine in Tor, they
are the search engine you would use if you value privacy.

The scary thing now is how every packet is being inspected as it travels the
network. So your footprint is not limited even by what services you access.
Network wide timing analysis leaves Tor vulnerable. There's no a better option
if you need low latency privacy. Are there places where you can actually dial
up the latency slightly to increase the privacy? I haven't found them.

