Apple Maps Gooses DuckDuckGo In Search Privacy Partnership (cnet.com)

Search engine DuckDuckGo now displays location information from Apple Maps in its search results. "DuckDuckGo now uses Apple Maps both for small maps in location-related search results and for larger, interactive search results that appear in a separate maps tab," reports CNET. "That replaces a combination including MapBox, OpenStreetMap and homegrown technology." From the report: The top reason DuckDuckGo argues you should try it is that it doesn't keep any personal information on you and what you searched for, unlike search leader Google. That dovetails nicely with Apple's sustained push to improve online privacy. But maintaining your privacy can be tough when you're looking for location-related information. DuckDuckGo says it's struck a balance, though. It doesn't send personally identifiable information such as your computer's Internet Protocol network address, to Apple or other third parties, DuckDuckGo said. "For local searches, where your approximate location information is sent by your browser to us, we discard it immediately after use," the company added.

Comments

That's mildly disappointing

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I would have preferred it if Duckduckgo had worked with Openstreetmap. If would have fitted their general self-declared ethics better methink.

So yeah, going to bed with Apple is better than integrating into the Google collective - although I don't believe Apple's good intentions for one second, and working with Google was never an option for DDG in the first place anyway. But it's kind of meh really...

Re:That's mildly disappointing

[Dan East]

I would have preferred it if Duckduckgo had worked with Openstreetmap.

OSM provides the data, however they do not provide hosting of tilesets. From OSM's terms:

OpenStreetMap’s own servers are run entirely on donated resources. They have strictly limited capacity. Heavy use of OSM tiles adversely affects people’s ability to edit the map, and is an abuse of the individual donations and sponsorship which provide hardware and bandwidth. As a result, we require that users of the tiles abide by this tile usage policy.

OpenStreetMap data is free for everyone to use. Our tile servers are not.

Emphasis theirs. That is why DuckDuckGo was using MapBox. MapBox hosts tilesets generated from Open Street Map data (plus they have some really sweet interactive map styling tools and can provide tiles in your own styles), however MapBox gets expensive if the volume is high, and certainly DuckDuckGo's volume is extremely high.

Also, MapBox uses tracking just like Google to generate traffic layers for their maps. Apps that have MapBox embedded in them are contributing their location data and motion for MapBox to generate live traffic maps, exactly like Google Maps.

So it's likely that DuckDuckGo is no worse off using Apple for their maps, from a privacy and data sharing perspective.

Re:That's mildly disappointing

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

OSM provides the data, however they do not provide hosting of tilesets. From OSM's terms

What I meant was DDG using OSM data and rolling their own service. It's more expensive than using a 3rd party provider - which is cheaper because it gets to exploit the data DDG will inevitably hand over to them - but if DDG truly cared about privacy, they would have done it.

That's what's mildly disappointing: it tells me DDG is okay with compromising when it suits them. Pragmatically, I understand these services cost money to run and provide for free. Yet I can't help drawing a parallel with an early version of another company that promised not to do evil but eventually gave up on the promise.

In other words, I'm wondering if this is the first sign that DDG is abandoning its ideals (because of simple economics, no doubt) and will eventually go full nasty, like all the other big data players.

Re:That's mildly disappointing

[Anubis IV]

If you'd prefer to use OSM, you should check your settings in DuckDuckGo. You can change your "Direction Source" (i.e. map provider) between Apple, Bing, HERE, Google, and OpenStreetMap. I have no idea who HERE is, but the rest should be self-explanatory.

Re:That's mildly disappointing

[ediron2]

Jeez, give it a break. First, it ain't like 'rolling their own' mapping application is as easy ordering chinese takeout. And despite Apple's spectacularly-better scores from security analysts on hardware encryption and privacy-impacted data collected, you declare (without evidence) that a partnership with Apple is proof of DDG engaging in a much larger sellout. That's some serious bullshitery (quotes and links below).

DDG mapping appears to give requested features, with an improved security default to rely upon (DDG + Apple maps put through DDG's ability to filter and consolidate in ways that degrade tracking and provide moderate anonymization). The enemy of Good Enough, in this case, is a false choice of Perfect or Nothing.

DDG sayeth: "Naturally, our strict privacy policy of not collecting or sharing any personal information extends to this integration. We do not send any personally identifiable information such as IP address to Apple or other third parties. For local searches, where your approximate location information is sent by your browser to us, we discard it immediately after use. You are still anonymous when you perform map and address-related searches on DuckDuckGo. You can read more about our anonymous localized results here."

The only element where DDG seems unduly optimistic is in that linked paper on anonymized-localized results, toward the bottom. They say doing what they do makes your activity 'completely anonymous'. Web bugs, clientside code, partnership-maintained tracking and/or any continuum of user activity breaches that veil. But search requests through DDG *breaks* what they can of that continuum by degrees, since they don't tokenize, save and track themselves, and they don't relay request data that helps that. So, someone might track my activity via their own trickery or partnership-maintained-tracking in the pages I visit, but the misdeeds of other websites aren't DDG's direct fault.

I think it fits

[SuperKendall]

I would have preferred it if Duckduckgo had worked with Openstreetmap. If would have fitted their general self-declared ethics better methink.

I think it fits in pretty well with general ethics, since Apple goes to great lengths to keep user data private.

If you compare the two on the web, Apple Maps performs somewhat better, and also presents store information better.

It's kind of an odd integration at the moment though, as you have to get to a map through DuckDuckGo, then once open there's no way to re-search the map you are viewing without going back to the DDG search screen.

Something interesting I saw also - when I searched fro a local Discount Tire, my iPhone revealed the correct location exactly, as did OpenStreetMaps (which you'd expect). But from Duck Duck Go, it was located on the wrong side of the service street it lies along... it kind of seems like maybe Duck Duck Go is just handing off a GPS location and not leaning on Apple Maps understanding of where businesses are really located.

Re:I think it fits

[tlhIngan]

Something interesting I saw also - when I searched fro a local Discount Tire, my iPhone revealed the correct location exactly, as did OpenStreetMaps (which you'd expect). But from Duck Duck Go, it was located on the wrong side of the service street it lies along... it kind of seems like maybe Duck Duck Go is just handing off a GPS location and not leaning on Apple Maps understanding of where businesses are really located.

And that's a good thing - it reduces the amount of data that Apple is getting. While Apple is about privacy, why not take the extra step to make sure Apple isn't getting useful information?

Sure the location will end up wrong from time to time, but it means Apple only gets coordinates rather than information that was searched for. And even if Apple promises to keep it secret, why take the chance? Just give a GPS coordinate and let Apple try to figure out which of a dozen businesses a user searched for.

No need to provide more information than needed, after all.

Re:I think it fits

[rtb61]

Let's cut to the chase, choosing Apple will in terms of marketing penetration, allow DuckDuckGo to more readily Goose Google and that is what it is all about. From Apple's perspective, DuckDuckGo, allows it to penetrate more into Google Android territory.

Apple with the Loud Moral High Ground

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, Apple has a sustained push to improve privacy. That's why they accepted money from Google to make its search the default. That way they get to trumpet loudly about having the moral high-ground, while still pocketing billions from their customers' personal data.

Re:Apple with the Loud Moral High Ground

[AHuxley]

So many US brands kept PRISM private for the US gov.

Re:Apple doesn't know what the scroll wheel is for

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously know nothing about MacOs or how the Apple wireless mouse works.

Re:Very slow

[Rockoon]

But the lack of mouse wheel zoom is a show stopper for me.

I have noticed a trend of abandoning mouse interoperability in lots of places. The touch screen crowd is a bigger market now. It sucks.

Re:What is wrong using Google in private tab

[AHuxley]

The repeated search history and patterns add up to the discovery of the person.
A VPN does not change the words used to search. Its just a new IP every search.
The terms used to search are the key to tracking a person not just their ISP/IP.

Gooses?

[coofercat]

What does 'gooses' mean? Geese? Chooses? What?

Re:Gooses?

[tuxkamen]

Goose as a verb (idiom) means to play a practical joke upon someone. Not entirely sure how that is apropos to the article.

Tim Cook's contribution

[Bromancer]

Duck duck go's search results will be displayed thinner font.

Re:What is wrong using Google in private tab

[Anubis IV]

So unless they fingerprint my browser, not much data collection can happen.

That's like saying, "So unless robbers do what robbers do, not much will be stolen."

Of course they're fingerprinting your browser. Hell, Google was just fined a few years ago for exploiting a bug in Safari that allowed them to track private Safari users like you. The bug was fixed and Google isn't allowed to exploit bugs like that any longer, but there's nothing stopping them from using the other, "legitimate" tools available to them to track you.

Just off the top of my head and depending on how careful you are, you can likely still be identified between sessions thanks to the fonts you have installed; your user agent string and browser properties; "supercookies" in canvas elements, local storage, Flash, or header properties injected by your ISP and/or VPN (have you actually checked your VPN's terms to confirm that they protect your privacy? Many of them are just as bad as traditional ISPs); local storage communication between tabs (e.g. you ever wonder how other tabs know when to refresh after you log into Google in a different tab? Local storage is how); your mouse movements; the style of your prose; your typing cadence; your search terms; your pattern of activity during the day; and the list goes on and on.

You're not nearly as anonymous as you think. They may not know your IP, but who cares when they still know it's you?

Re:What is wrong using Google in private tab

[swillden]

The repeated search history and patterns add up to the discovery of the person. A VPN does not change the words used to search. Its just a new IP every search. The terms used to search are the key to tracking a person not just their ISP/IP.

If it's a different IP and a private/incognito tab, there's no way to connect one search to another, so no way to link them to a person, and therefore no way to "discover" a person.