Edit -- From the article: "Additionally, using HTTPS helps providers like Google remove information from the referrer string."
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.
If they don't switch, puts some sort of upper bound on how much they value the referer data.
(User agents aren't supposed to send referer http->https but scratch above if practice is for them not to send https->https across domains as well.)
Clients SHOULD NOT include a Referer header field in a (non-secure)
HTTP request if the referring page was transferred with a secure
As a side benefit, the config also turns SafeSearch and personalization off.
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.
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'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 seems almost negligent to have not done it sooner.
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.