News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @02:57PM (#1361945)
Good catch, really. Trivial to fix fortunately. Not that I care too much about super secure secret searches, but if they're advertised as such they should be. And even then, you probably should assume they're not. (secret).
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by MikeCapone on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:26PM (#1362033)
> Not that I care too much about super secure secret searches, but if they're advertised as such they should be.

Exactly. Sure you could use Tor and disable everything and log on a random wifi from a stolen computer that will then be smashed to bits and melted, but that's beside the point; if DDG advertises privacy, it should do everything it can to deliver on that promise.

Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by imp on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:27PM (#1362036)
I can't figure out what the trivial fix is. Would proxying all S3 requests through his server fix the issue, or do the headers get passed through to Amazon anyway?
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by nrj on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:47PM (#1362103)
One fix is to not directly send the users to the result page. Instead link to a redirect script on the ddg servers i.e, duckduckgo.com/goto.php?link=http://search-result.com/ and then have goto.php remove the REFERER from the request headers.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:51PM (#1362118)
Not sure if that will work in all browsers, iirc a 301 or a 302 can still pass those headers on. The only trick I know of that will not do that is by using a 'meta refresh' with a time set to '0', but that has bad implications for the working of the 'back' button.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by nrj on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @04:46PM (#1362290)
I haven't tested this out, but I don't see why something like this wouldn't work...

<?php

   header("Location: the-result.com");

   header("Referer: ");
?>
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @04:52PM (#1362306)
Referer is a header the browser sends, Location is a header the server sends. Also, the Location header needs either a relative url on the local machine or a fully qualified one. In this case it would have needed a fully qualified one.

So maybe you should have tested it ;) ?

Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by btucker on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:42PM (#1362090)
I wouldn't say there is a trivial fix. One option would be to encrypt the search term client-side with blowfish (or some other 2-way hash scheme) and use that as the url string.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by gizmomagico on Thursday May 20, 2010 @01:35AM (#1363322)
Erm.. You probably mean something like a "symmetric block cipher", such as Blowfish. The point of (cryptographic) hashes is that they're one way only.

But as for a fix, at least Opera offers the option of never sending referrer information. That would be enough in this case.

Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by code_duck on Thursday May 20, 2010 @02:16AM (#1363367)
Firefox offers that option as well - you just have to go to about:config and set network.http.sendRefererHeader to 0.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:36PM (#1362067)
Don't put offsite images in secure searches.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by eli on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:41PM (#1362084)
These aren't really offsite images. ddgw.s3.amazonaws.com is a server instance run by DDG. It just happens to live in Amazon's cloud.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:47PM (#1362106)
Yes, but the headers are sent in plaintext.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by epi0Bauqu on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:54PM (#1362128)
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @03:58PM (#1362147)
That was about the headers to the image server which was not using https at the time I believe ?
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by eli on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @04:06PM (#1362173)
No, they aren't.
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by jacquesm on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @04:10PM (#1362183)
Not any more but they were when that was written. See: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1362122
Re:DuckDuckGo Searches Are Not Anonymous by mike-cardwell on Wednesday May 19, 2010 @05:07PM (#1362355)
I think you might be confusing S3 with EC2? I think "offsite images" is an apt description for stuff served from Amazons web frontend to S3... DDG don't run it, they just upload the content to it.