• detalferous
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Duck duck go protects you from this, correct?

    Why would anyone use Google after this precedent?

    • hellequin67
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Headquartered in the US so I wouldn’t guarantee it.
      This was against Google specifically but I would imagine it would hold up against any US based search engine they felt someone was using.

      • detalferous
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, they must respond to a subpoena. But they don’t retain search records, do they?

        • MJBrune@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In some cases they must retain the information. Like your ISP in the USA had to retain data for le purposes.

          • detalferous
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Your statement contradicts their stated policy, and I’m not aware of any such requirement in the US.

            https://duckduckgo.com/privacy

            IP retention is addressed in the first paragraph under “privacy policy”, and it stated they don’t save or log it.

              • detalferous
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Your point is not unique: all websites require your trust.

                So if that’s your threat model you can’t use any search engine.

                But if we want to put that aside and discuss their stated policy, then the link I provided addressed the parent statement that

                In some cases they must retain the information. Like your ISP in the USA had to retain data for le purposes.

                Which directly refutes that there is any such requirement.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think all search engines have this issue since law enforcement can step in any time.

      The one exception might be proxy searches