Privacy-Centric Search Engine Scroogle Shuts Down

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Privacy-Centric Search Engine Scroogle Shuts Down

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday February 21, 2012 @05:11PM from the rock-and-a-hard-place dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Daniel Brandt started his 'Scroogle' search engine because he wanted to provide increased privacy to people who searched online through Google. Unfortunately, while Google tolerated this for a while, they began throttling Scroogle queries. This, in combination with extensive DDoS attacks on Brandt's servers, has caused him to take Scroogle offline, along with his other domains. He said, 'I no longer have any domains online. I also took all my domains out of DNS because I want to signal to the criminal element that I have no more servers to trash. This hopefully will ward off further attacks on my previous providers. Scroogle.org is gone forever. Even if all my DDoS problems had never started in December, Scroogle was already getting squeezed from Google's throttling, and was already dying. It might have lasted another six months if I hadn't lost seven servers from DDoS, but that's about all.' Internet users who made use of the services will now need to investigate other options."

31 of 128 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

And bing? by zoloto · 2012-02-21 17:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

If google was "Squeezing" scroogle by limiting queries, why aren't they doing the same to microsoft's Bing?
DuckDuckGo by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 17:20 · Score: 5, Interesting

They've a clear policy of not sharing or collecting info
1. Re:DuckDuckGo by PatPending · 2012-02-21 17:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  https://www.startpage.com/ bills itself as "the world's most private search engine"
  
  --
  What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
2. Re:DuckDuckGo by hobarrera · 2012-02-21 18:46 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  If only the results where competitive with Google's. But they're not, and it's a shame, because I like DDG in principle, but when it comes to results, they're not there yet.
3. Re:DuckDuckGo by dragonquest · 2012-02-21 18:58 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  StartPage is run by the IxQuick guys. They are basically the same meta-search engine with Startpage adding Google to the fray.
  
  --
  "Never try to tell everything you know. It may take too short a time."
4. Re:DuckDuckGo by steelfood · 2012-02-21 19:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They need a better brand if they want to make it big. I'm not commenting on the service per se. But the brand name itself is a big element in what draws new users.
  It's three words, comprising one syllable each. So it's effectively five units in length of time to say. Not only that, but the hard "K" in "duck" forces the intermediate pause between the first two words, and encourages it between the latter two (attempts to say the name in only three units' time would sound closer to DU-DUCK-O). The pauses in between each of the individual words carries over from speech to mental reading and writing. Both the writer and the reader, are speaking their words inside their heads when they write or read. Which means the brand is both annoying to read and write about.
  The repetition of "duck" makes the URL pretty annoying to type as well. At they very least, they can get a shorter domain that's easy to remember! For other types of products, the need might be different, but for a text-based internet destination, it's gotta be easy to type. They got the "duck" and "go" parts are more or less correct (no one-finger acrobatics needed to type the words), but the repeated duck completely negates the benefit.
  Otherwise, they seem like an acceptable alternative to Scroogle. I've used them before, but Google is just easier to type (the double-o detracts a bit, but the brevity of the name more than makes up for this), so I always end up going back to Google.
  
  --
  "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
5. Re:DuckDuckGo by Rick17JJ · 2012-02-21 20:22 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Startpage does not record your IP address or track your searches. The Startpage the results are actually generated by Google.
  Startpage supports SSL. So, when I type in Startpage.com, "https" appears in front of their URL instead of "http." That extra "s" tells me that that encryption is being used between my browser and the Startpage servers.
  The sister search engine to Startpage is Ixquick. If I am not mistaken, the Ixquick search results are generated by various search engines other than Google.
  Startpage also offers the option of viewing web sites through their proxy service. When selecting something from their search results, just click on "view by Ixquick proxy." Then, they only see the Startpage IP address, instead of your IP address. However, I have almost never actually bothered to use the proxy feature.
  Privacy advocate Katherine Albrecht is the enthusiastic spokeswoman for Startpage.
  https://startpage.com/
6. Re:DuckDuckGo by LordLimecat · 2012-02-22 02:34 · Score: 2
  
  Wait, Startpage is making Google do all the hard work, then stripping their ads and adding their own for revenue?
  Doesnt that seem a little shady to you?
7. Re:DuckDuckGo by GargamelSpaceman · 2012-02-22 02:52 · Score: 2
  
  I really like your signature.
  
  --
  ...
8. Re:DuckDuckGo by TheRaven64 · 2012-02-22 06:47 · Score: 2
  
  I've been using them for about a year. Occasionally I don't get a useful result, so I try Google. So far, I have not come across a single instance where DDG does not provide a useful result but Google does (although several times DDG will produce no results and Google will produce 100,000 totally irrelevant links). I also find the DDG zero-click information contains the result I want for more than half of my searches.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Scroogle is not a search engine. by Animats · 2012-02-21 17:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

Scroogle is not a search engine. Scroogle is a hosted front end to Google. DuckDuckGo is a real search engine, one with good privacy policies and only one ad per page.
1. Re:Scroogle is not a search engine. by gQuigs · 2012-02-21 17:31 · Score: 2
  
  And a link... http://duckduckgo.com/
  ddg.gg is a short url that redirects...
  They have sites explaining how they don't track or "bubble" you:
  http://donttrack.us/
  http://dontbubble.us/
2. Re:Scroogle is not a search engine. by ozmanjusri · 2012-02-21 18:04 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  duk duo go pulls search queries from bing
  No it doesn't, it's searches are actually quite good.
  From Wikipedia:
  "DuckDuckGo's results are a mashup of many sources, including Yahoo! Search BOSS, Wikipedia, Wolfram Alpha and its own Web crawler, the DuckDuckBot.[2][21][22] It uses data from crowd-sourced sites, especially Wikipedia, to populate "Zero-click Info" boxes, which are grey boxes containing topic summaries and related topics above results.[23] DuckDuckGo also offers the ability to show mostly shopping sites or mostly info (non-shopping) sites via search buttons on its homepage.[24]"
  
  --
  "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
3. Re:Scroogle is not a search engine. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 18:25 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  duk duo go pulls search queries from bing
  
  Oh, so it does get its search results from Google after all.
4. Re:Scroogle is not a search engine. by SnowZero · 2012-02-21 22:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No it doesn't
  Yes it does. Search for [digital camera] on Bing and DDG. Notice that the first ad is not just similar, it is exactly the same:
  
  Sony® Digital Cameras
  Digital Cameras for Beautiful Pictures. Free Shipping Order Now!
  store.sony.com
  Ok, so they are using AdCenter for ads, but that might not be true for actual search results. Now search for something esoteric and not likely to be in a tiny corpus, such as [state space motion planning]. The results have been re-ordered so clearly DDG has some re-ranking heuristics, but the results that are common (nearly all of them) are uncannily similar, including in most cases the exact same summary snippet. For example, the following exact result (all text) comes back in both:
  
  Informed and Probabilistically Complete Search for Motion Planning ...
  Sampling-based search has been shown effective in motion planning, a hard continuous state-space problem. Motion planning is especially challenging when the robotic system
  Having a common phrase used throughout a paper yield exactly the same extracted snippet is unlikely, unless the implementations are identical. Since Bing isn't open source, Occam's Razor says they are using the API.
  The simple fact is that one guy cannot implement a modern search engine, despite our hopes for the continued relevance of the garage revolutionary. While DDG likes to downplay the Bing API dependence, the majority of results come from there, and the rest is a few bits of sugar peppered on top for common queries. Claiming that having a special mode for wikipedia or "zero click" boxes makes it no longer Bing-using is kind of like saying Google's calculator means it doesn't need a search index.
This is deeply unfortunate by JoshuaZ · 2012-02-21 17:29 · Score: 3, Informative

I'm really saddened by this. I myself had a few tussles with Daniel before (I was very involved when he tried (unfortunately successfully)to get his Wikipedia entry deleted, and I'm a pretty biased source. During that process, he engaged in some pretty nasty behavior, including posting online the personal details of a various Wikipedians, including some who were minors. In the worst act, he gave the personal details of a female admin to Andrew Morrow, an individual who had made hobby of sexually harassing high level female Wikipedians. In that case, Morrow then, using the data from Brandt actually showed up to her place of work. Daniel expressed zero remorse over this and related issues. However, Scroogle was unambiguously a good thing that Daniel was doing. Daniel doesn't play well with others, and in the last year or so, his main feud has been with various elements of Encyclopedia Dramatica along with some of the nastier bits of Anonymous. It shouldn't be too surprising that they really are willing to respond in pretty nasty and destructive ways. The loss of Scroogle represents a real loss of a helpful service. But given that Daniel has now taken down all his domains including Wikipedia Watch which was primarily a list of personal details of various Wikipedians, I do have to see some minimal silver lining. But it isn't sufficient. The internet shouldn't be censored, whether by the government, or by people who have the capability to launch sustained Denial of Service Attacks. There's a real problem here wen someone as stubborn and experienced as Brandt can be brought down by this sort of thing. We worry a lot about censorship from governments through things like ACTA and SOPA, but this sort of thing is functionally as bad. Daniel Brandt's free speech has been essentially curtailed here. Much of that is speech I disagree with, but there's a relevant line attributed to Voltaire about that.
1. Re:This is deeply unfortunate by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 18:01 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Much of that is speech I disagree with, but there's a relevant line attributed to Voltaire about that.
  Don't feel bad, free speech is OK, but free speech and damn the consequences is dangerous and can be damaging.
  If you are speaking with no intent but to bring harm to others, you're outside the scope of, let's call it "the spirit" of the First Amendment. It was written to uphold the right of the people to criticise their government, not to give safe harbour to malicious people who, quote: [post] online the personal details of a various Wikipedians, including some who were minors
  So you can love free speech, and simultaneously seek to prevent people from deliberately saying harmful things.
2. Re:This is deeply unfortunate by GmExtremacy · 2012-02-21 18:10 · Score: 2
  
  but free speech and damn the consequences is dangerous and can be damaging.
  There is no such thing as "free speech with consequences." Well, provided you meant the government punishing you, anyway. Otherwise, even the worst countries have freedom of speech.
  
  let's call it "the spirit" of the First Amendment.
  Let's not. That sounds like an awfully slippery slope right there. If you want unprotected speech, a constitutional amendment is in order. And that's difficult to do for a reason.
  
  So you can love free speech, and simultaneously seek to prevent people from deliberately saying harmful things.
  No, you can't. That's not truly free speech. Even if you think it shouldn't be allowed, speech is still being censored.
3. Re:This is deeply unfortunate by Lehk228 · 2012-02-21 18:13 · Score: 2
  
  if he has managed to make enemies of wikipedia and ED he must be a real winner
  
  --
  Snowden and Manning are heroes.
DuckDuckGo by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 17:33 · Score: 5, Informative

Seriously, DuckDuckGo has the friendliest privacy policy around. They don't track you or bubble you. They run a TOR exit enclave, and if you're already using TOR, you can reach their search engine without exiting the onion by using their hidden service.
Daniel Brandt is a loony by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 17:39 · Score: 5, Informative

Daniel Brandt is a loony. His first tussle with Google started about 10 years ago when he ran a conspiracy theory site and demanded to know why Google wouldn't show his site in the first page when people searched for famous people names. He attempted to start a movement to force Congress to make Google a public utility service and created google-watch! He created scroogle shortly after, to get back at google (it was nothing but a scraper of google results), and claimed that the back-end code was written in C for maximum speed. He even published the scroogle source code to prove it. I remember reading it then and it was a badly written CGI program with several buffer overflows (As a side note, the guy also seemed to be totally unaware of the overheads of running CGI scripts, whether written in C or any other language, or basics of tuning an Apache server. This explained why his site couldn't handle too many requests in the first place!)
1. Re:Daniel Brandt is a loony by gmhowell · 2012-02-21 21:58 · Score: 2
  
  That hardly scratches the surface. You haven't mentioned him stalking a wikipedia editor and serving time for said stunt.
  
  --
  Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Investigate by stms · 2012-02-21 17:52 · Score: 2

Google Sharing it works great most of the time. I never used (or heard of) Scroogle but it would have be nice for when I don't have access to Firefox.
Re:Hackers with a vendetta? by ColdWetDog · 2012-02-21 17:57 · Score: 5, Funny

OK, thanks, here goes:
*** PLEASE FORWARD TO THE APPROPRIATE STAFF MEMBERS ****
Dear Sirs:
I have been requested by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company to contact you for assistance in resolving a matter. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company has recently concluded a large number of contracts for oil exploration in the sub-Sahara region. The contracts have immediately produced moneys equalling US$40,000,000. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company is desirous of oil exploration in other parts of the world, however, because of certain regulations of the Nigerian Government, it is unable to move these funds to another region.
You assistance is requested as a non-Nigerian citizen to assist the Nigerian National Petroleum Company, and also the Central Bank of Nigeria, in moving these funds out of Nigeria. If the funds can be transferred to your name, in your United States account, then you can forward the funds as directed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company. In exchange for your accommodating services, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company would agree to allow you to retain 10%, or US$4 million of this amount.
However, to be a legitimate transferee of these moneys according to Nigerian law, you must presently be a depositor of at least US$100,000 in a Nigerian bank which is regulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria.
If it will be possible for you to assist us, we would be most grateful. We suggest that you meet with us in person in Lagos, and that during your visit I introduce you to the representatives of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company, as well as with certain officials of the Central Bank of Nigeria.
Please call me at your earliest convenience at 234-598-212-5419. Time is of the essence in this matter; very quickly the Nigerian Government will realize that the Central Bank is maintaining this amount on deposit, and attempt to levy certain depository taxes on it.
You

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
About Daniel Brandt by tbird81 · 2012-02-21 17:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Daniel_Brandt
"I don't regard [Brandt] as a valid source about anything at all, based on my interactions with him. I tried very hard to help him, and he misrepresented nearly everything about our conversation in his very strange rant. He considers the very existence of a Wikipedia article about him to be a privacy violation, despite being a public person. I find it hard to take him very seriously at all. He misrepresents everything about our procedures, claiming that we have a 'secret police' and so on." - Jimbo Wales
1. Re:About Daniel Brandt by jdogalt · 2012-02-21 19:38 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  ""I don't regard [Brandt] as a valid source about anything at all..." - Jimbo Wales"
  That sounds like a cut and dry +5 perspective. But being the same sort of person as Daniel Brandt (or at least, I presume the same slashdot commenters calling him a looney would call me one as well), I decided to use non-google search engines, and results not already posted here, to try and make a real evaluation of D.B. I found a long thread he participated in, that was remarkably coherent, and intelligent, about his experiments reverse engineering how google works. Say what you will, but technically, on subjects he is passionate about, he comes off very well. In fact, he's so clever, all he had to do was throw in a bizarre offhand comment such as 'tighter than a bikini on a Bomis babe', and it inspired me to google that, and get this wired article, which IMO should negate the +5 of the parent comment. Jimmy Wales does not come off looking like such a valid source , after reading this- http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/12/69880
  "Public edit logs reveal that Wales has changed his own Wikipedia bio 18 times, deleting phrases describing former Wikipedia employee Larry Sanger as a co-founder of the site.
  Wales has also repeatedly revised the description of a search site he founded called Bomis, which included a section with adult photos called "Bomis Babes.""
setup your own by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 19:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

Use the Seeks open source project (http://www.seeks-project.info/) to setup a public or your own scroogle... It's also P2P enabled so servers can share results. Scroogle was nice, but you can do it yourself easily now.
Sort of by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-21 20:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

They had a toolbar, if you clicked the 'send anonymous statistics data to Microsoft to improve our services' button then it was supposed to send anonymous stats to MS. However it turned out they were scraping the queries you ran on Google and sending the whole lot, results, the search, what you clicked on etc. back to Microsoft.
And not anonymous data either. Detailed tracking data, and a unique id that can be used to de-anonymize you.
It was Carrier IQ in IE form.
To me what made it worse is they were unrepentant once caught. Pretending it wasn't copying because they took these 'signals' from many sites and the result was merged. Which is incredible face. They didn't even pretend not to be tracking their users, they were proud of it.
And no prosecution either, nobody chased them, too much clout in politics.
1. Re:Sort of by tqk · 2012-02-22 02:51 · Score: 2
  
  i really wish you didn't post AC so i could mod you up.
  Not to worry, AC. Others weren't so stupid as you. It's at +5 Insightful as I read it.
  
  --
  "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
Re:The Perfect Search Engine by IAmGarethAdams · 2012-02-21 20:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

- would cost a lot of money to build
- has no way of reconciling that cost
Re:The Perfect Search Engine by raynet · 2012-02-21 22:12 · Score: 2

It could be funded by EU, just to show that goverments sometimes, just sometimes, can make things work.

--
- Raynet --> .