41–50 of 65 posts
The largest company which tracks surfing habits without need for HTTP cookies is Amazon. When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you, without saving/reading any cookies. The same is for any server hosting provider companies.
> When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you Is that just an unsubstantial accusation or do you have a source for that?
The largest company which tracks surfing habits without need for HTTP cookies is Amazon. When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you, without saving/reading any cookies. The same is for any server hosting provider companies.
So I'm going to go on a limb and say you are probably wrong.
Also remember using free Google dns 8.8.8.8 is not that free they track your dns requests.
The largest company which tracks surfing habits without need for HTTP cookies is Amazon. When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you, without saving/reading any cookies. The same is for any server hosting provider companies.
> When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you Is that just an unsubstantial accusation or do you have a source for that?
The largest company which tracks surfing habits without need for HTTP cookies is Amazon. When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you, without saving/reading any cookies. The same is for any server hosting provider companies.
Amazon stands to lose billions of dollars if what you say is found to be true. They host governments, banks, health care facilities, payment providers and more, all of which would sue the shit out of AWS if they found this out. So I'm going to go on a limb and say you are probably wrong.
When you visit a website hosted on AWS, your IP and browser fingerprint are all sent to AWS's servers, that is why they can track you. Whether or not they really track you is another thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When you visit every website hosted on AWS, Amazon tracks you Is that just an unsubstantial accusation or do you have a source for that?
Yes, that would be interesting to know more about. Potentially there is a lot of data to be harvested, isn't there?
There are a lot of dark patterns Google could use to track you if it wanted to. Does it? Who can say besides those on the inside. If you think they're using this, then there are probably half a dozen other methods you also think they are using, so this shouldn't bother you (at least, not any more than you are already bothered). If you don't think they're using any of those half a dozen other methods, you probably sho…
> ... if it wanted to Made me smile. Google needs to track you, its their core business model. Defeat is not an option, all methods should be found and blocked. Thankfully Chrome is not the only usable browser, and network requests are detectable.
What business case is there for Google to work hard at tracking people, defeating anti-tracking measures? There is a cost to doing that, and I don't see a financial incentive for doing it.
There are certainly business cases for Google to not defeat anti-tracking measures, as collecting that sort of data is a liability. However, per previous lawsuits like the mapping cars sniffing WIFI data, perhaps they are still just trying to collect everything they can without thought to if it is a benefit, waste, or liability.
So DNS over HTTPS sounds great.
I don't see ISPs starting DOH servers up within the next 5 years, so either way, you'll be performing dns lookups to a central server.
Does this allow Cloudflare to tie together user sessions to different HTTPS domains?
If X and Y are Cloudflare fronted domains, can they now pair sessions? I'm guessing a DOH session queries for domain X and immediately an HTTPS connection appears for X, then queries for Y and another appears at Y. Then the whole DOH session becomes identifiable once Cloudflare fronts any service with email sign in.
Unless I'm mistaken at least UDP DNS made the guess work a lot harder because you couldn't pin a session down behind an internet gateway as easily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... if it wanted to Made me smile. Google needs to track you, its their core business model. Defeat is not an option, all methods should be found and blocked. Thankfully Chrome is not the only usable browser, and network requests are detectable.
Google does not need to track anyone. Google needs to sell ads, and Google needs to be perceived as the best place to spend your advertising budged. What business case is there for Google to work hard at tracking people, defeating anti-tracking measures? There is a cost to doing that, and I don't see a financial incentive for doing it. There are certainly business cases for Google to not defeat anti-tracking measures…
The only way to sell an ad placement to white males, with >100k income, in this zip code, with specific health problem is to track those people, and Google tracks them all.
FB gets data from your posts and messages, Google gets it from your emails, files, searches, location. Both get data from your browsing history (Like buttons, G-Analytics scripts), as do all the rest of third party trackers (cookies).