[HN Gopher] What does "Copy clean link" mean?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What does "Copy clean link" mean?
        
       Author : gregors
       Score  : 258 points
       Date   : 2023-03-09 18:30 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (support.brave.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (support.brave.com)
        
       | m463 wrote:
       | Why wouldn't businesses just switch to unique links?
       | 
       | In other words, like switching an amazon link from:
       | https://www.amazon.com/dp/<product-id>
       | 
       | to a shortened tracking url like:
       | https://amzn.to/<unique-id>
        
         | rovr138 wrote:
         | I feel someone did something like this.
         | 
         | Maybe facebook? Probably facebook...
         | 
         |  _Edit_
         | 
         | It was facebook, https://tidbits.com/2022/07/19/facebook-
         | change-ensures-track...
         | 
         | There's a discussion here,
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32129100
        
       | haburka wrote:
       | BRB going to change all my tracking query strings to get around
       | this. don't be mad at me my OKR is getting tracking to work 2%
       | better.
        
         | tshaddox wrote:
         | You should add an extra query param containing a MAC that is
         | required to be present and correct for the URL to load. Just
         | kill the normal idea of web URLs altogether.
        
       | indymike wrote:
       | I love the idea of reducing extra paramspam on urls... but this
       | is easily defeated with a redirect. I.e. somedomain.com/<uid
       | here>
        
         | suddenclarity wrote:
         | Isn't this more of a convince when sharing a link than removing
         | the tracking from your own sessions? It kinda assumes that
         | you're already at the final destination when copying so no
         | redirect will be of any use. Or I'm just misunderstanding the
         | purpose.
        
       | pphysch wrote:
       | How does Brave determine what is a necessary query parameter and
       | what is not?
        
         | poisonborz wrote:
         | Speculation: they have a list of popular sites & tracking tags
        
           | paulsmith wrote:
           | I've always thought those ?v= after YouTube links and ?id=
           | after HN articles looked sus ...
        
             | dymk wrote:
             | It's how YouTube tracks what videos I watch and how HN
             | tracks what comments I've read! Dastardly clever of them...
        
           | lmkg wrote:
           | Indeed, a few clicks from the article arrives at the specific
           | list:
           | 
           | https://github.com/brave/brave-
           | core/blob/master/browser/net/...
        
         | zamnos wrote:
         | even just manually putting fbclid on the list would go a long
         | way to assuaging the paranoid
        
         | joe5150 wrote:
         | Their filters are open source.
         | 
         | https://github.com/brave/brave-core/blob/master/browser/net/...
        
           | pphysch wrote:
           | Thanks! Seems unlikely to hit any false positives.
        
             | jay_kyburz wrote:
             | Also trivial to bypass if a developer could care less.
        
       | sphars wrote:
       | For Android, I've been using URLCheck[0] for opening any link
       | system wide, to clean the URL and check for redirects and open in
       | specific browser. Just have to set it as your default browser
       | 
       | [0]: https://github.com/TrianguloY/UrlChecker
        
       | legrande wrote:
       | Been using CleanLinks[0] on Firefox for a while now. Nice to know
       | I have the same feature in Brave now. Sometimes I manually remove
       | query params from URLs when sharing them. I really need to
       | automate that though!
       | 
       | [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/clean-
       | links-w...
        
         | ASalazarMX wrote:
         | Have you tried CleanURLs? It's a recommended extension, and has
         | 120K users compared to the 154 of Cleanlinks.
         | 
         | https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/clearurls/
        
       | techwizrd wrote:
       | For those looking for similar functionality in Firefox, Chrome,
       | and Edge, I've been using ClearURLs[0] for several years in
       | Firefox and Firefox on Android. It works well.
       | 
       | 0: https://github.com/ClearURLs/Addon
        
         | LorenDB wrote:
         | You beat me to it :)
        
         | atdt wrote:
         | Reviews on the Chrome Web Store mention that the extension can
         | break Google OAuth login flow and Amazon checkout. Did you
         | encounter that at all?
        
           | lamontcg wrote:
           | I don't use Google OAuth much but it works for when I need to
           | enter YTTV credentials. It has never broken Amazon checkout
           | for me, smells like FUD.
        
           | joe5150 wrote:
           | For what it's worth I use the FF version and I've never had
           | this problem as far as I can tell.
        
             | techwizrd wrote:
             | I also use the FF version and have not encountered this
             | problem (to my knowledge).
        
           | BeefySwain wrote:
           | I used to use this and it did indeed break Amazon checkout.
           | Took me forever to figure out!
        
           | ptaken wrote:
           | It does break youtrack quite severely and it took me forever
           | to single out this extension. Afaict there's also no way to
           | filter URLs so I had to get rid of it on my work browser :/
        
           | jonas-w wrote:
           | Not OP, and YMMV, but i never had problems with google,
           | amazon or any other website. ClearURLs is one of those
           | extensions you install, after you open your browser for the
           | first time and completely forget about it, because it just
           | works (TM). As a matter of fact, I had to make sure that it
           | was even installed, before commenting.
        
         | jjordan wrote:
         | Just be careful with this kind of plugin. Had something similar
         | installed a few years ago that was breaking some Google links
         | and I had no idea why until I realized I had this kind of
         | plugin installed.
        
         | morjom wrote:
         | uBlock Origin works well enough for me with some basic lists.
         | Recommended reading for firefox users:
         | 
         | https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/wiki/4.1-Extensions#-don...
        
           | kayson wrote:
           | What lists are you using for queryparams?
        
             | skrowl wrote:
             | In the default lists, under privacy, just subscribe to
             | "AdGuard URL Tracking Protection" and it'll do the same
             | thing for you
        
               | kayson wrote:
               | Thanks!
        
       | bhartzer wrote:
       | When copying or sharing a link, I usually manually strip out
       | everything after the ? in the URL.
       | 
       | I've been doing this manually for several years now.
       | 
       | Is it possible to create a bookmarklet that does the same thing
       | (i.e., via JavaSript)?
        
         | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
         | I have an app I use to monitor my clipboard and rewrite certain
         | URLs if sees, placing the clean version back in the clipboard
         | (being sure not to end up in an infinite loop).
        
         | LukeLambert wrote:
         | javascript:prompt('URL',window.location.origin+window.location.
         | pathname)
         | 
         | Edit: But be aware that some sites (like this one) use the
         | parameters in the query string.
        
       | gesman wrote:
       | Does it follow redirects and removes affiliate links?
        
       | enw wrote:
       | Why is capitalization inconsistent?
       | 
       | Some use sentence case, some title case.
        
       | timvisee wrote:
       | This is the same browser that did the opposite before: injecting
       | their own referral parameter in links.
        
         | colordrops wrote:
         | How long ago was this? Is it still the case? And why the flood
         | of comments like this in every Brave thread, but never on
         | Chrome threads? Chrome is purely and unapologetically a portal
         | specifically for supporting an ad network, yet I never see the
         | same sort of comments. At least Brave is upfront about what
         | they are doing.
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | TLDR: if you typed in binance.us, it autocompleted the
           | 'suggested site' Binance US, which included a referral link
           | that netted Brave (or maybe Eich themselves) some sum of
           | money (not sure how much it was then, but right now it's $100
           | USDT when your referral deposits $50).
           | 
           | The argument is that Brave should be considered referring
           | users if you get to Binance (or other sites) via the
           | Omnibox.. but it's disingenuous when it was suggested by the
           | query "Binance", since the user already had the intention to
           | visit and likely sign up for Binance. It would've been more
           | acceptable if the omnibox only injected the referral code if
           | you clicked 'Binance' when you tried to search "crypto
           | exchange".
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1269289242905042944
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1269423583480082432
        
           | yucky wrote:
           | Because these are astroturfed responses attacking Brave. You
           | see it on here anytime the browser is mentioned. Meanwhile,
           | it's the best browser available by a mile which explains
           | their attacks.
        
             | suprjami wrote:
             | Got an impartial source for "best"?
             | 
             | https://privacytests.org/ is created by a Brave employee,
             | so that doesn't count
        
               | GeorgeWBasic wrote:
               | You're asking someone for a source for their opinion,
               | instead of understanding what an opinion is?
        
               | judge2020 wrote:
               | "which explains their attacks" implies "they only attack
               | brave because they know it's objectively better than
               | other browsers".
        
             | crummy wrote:
             | people are paying hacker news commenters to post this
             | stuff?
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | > without interfering with coarse-grained campaign-level
         | tracking
         | 
         | I often manually scrub campaign-level stuff when sending links
         | to friends just to have nicer, shorter URLs
        
         | dormento wrote:
         | To be fair, seemed to be by mistake and quickly corrected. They
         | also issued an apoogy.
         | 
         | (disclamer: I still use Firefox and recomend you do so as
         | well).
        
           | rovr138 wrote:
           | That's a really intentional mistake to make.
           | 
           | Another Firefox user
        
             | colordrops wrote:
             | Firefox does all kinds of shady tracking too unfortunately.
             | Really the best option is to use forks of chrome or Firefox
             | if you are concerned with privacy.
        
               | harry8 wrote:
               | [citation needed]
        
           | dahdum wrote:
           | The mistake was getting caught? Eich's initial response was
           | that was intentional and ethical. Until it went viral and his
           | view evolved. Granted, I'm not too keen to give him or Brave
           | much benefit of doubt.
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1269289242905042944
        
           | princevegeta89 wrote:
           | If we're buying in that "by mistake" nonsense we're being so
           | incredibly naive. How can someone even programatically inject
           | referral links in your page "by mistake"?
           | 
           | I've seen too many instances like Google Chrome still
           | tracking you in incognito where companies just come back with
           | they were doing it "by mistake" to believe any of them were
           | really saying the truth.
        
             | Arainach wrote:
             | >Google Chrome still tracking you in incognito
             | 
             | When was this?
        
               | darig wrote:
               | [dead]
        
           | unxdfa wrote:
           | Eich doesn't seem like the sort of person who makes mistakes,
           | preferring to do a PR backtrack after misjudging his audience
           | after comparing them to his own dubious standards. Never the
           | sort who thinks they did something wrong but likes you to
           | think they did.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | nicce wrote:
           | Sadly, that is a standard procedure for many current
           | businesses. Do things until you get caught, then say it was a
           | mistake and apogolize.
           | 
           | Of course there are real mistakes, but this one was quite
           | difficult to make...
        
       | throwaway81523 wrote:
       | I use a python script for this and I constantly have to tweak it
       | to understand more urls. It's not just stripping out tracking
       | parameters. There are also redirects to bypass, real urls encoded
       | in the parameters of the tracked url, and all that. There are
       | some formats which I haven't figured out, like many of the ones
       | used in emailed links. I figure that once it converges I'll
       | rewrite it in Javascript as a browser extension, but even after a
       | year or two of usage and tweaking, it still misses a lot and
       | doesn't seem robust.
        
         | heyoni wrote:
         | Give us the gist!
        
       | smsm42 wrote:
       | Awesome, I was this close to making an extension for myself to do
       | it, it's so tiring to cut out the refspam every time you copy a
       | link.
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | The most amazing thing about this link is that the cloudflare
       | page it shows me before the actual page actually sends me to the
       | real page instead of just sitting and spinning forever no matter
       | how many captcha or whatever I do.
       | 
       | I suppose Brave went out of there way to tweak the cloudflare
       | options to allow cross browser compatibility. I didn't know this
       | was possible at all. I guess all the other sites on the web just
       | don't care.
        
         | harry8 wrote:
         | cloudflare is a real worry, huh? Not talked about much but
         | their power is quite a bit larger than a de-centralised web
         | should tolerate.
        
       | rafaelturk wrote:
       | This is great.. Amazing how simple, yeat I've never thought about
       | this
        
       | bonestamp2 wrote:
       | This is nice, but I wish it would also remove the google tracking
       | wrapper on URLs in g-suite.
        
       | gnicholas wrote:
       | I wish I could open a link from Messages this way. You can copy
       | the link, but doing so triggers a "preview", which loads the link
       | in an inset window.
        
       | rozab wrote:
       | https://github.com/ClearURLs/Addon
        
         | mananaysiempre wrote:
         | By way of idle curiosity: the Amazon example on the CleanURLs
         | homepage and in the repo README calls __mk_de_DE=AMAZON a
         | tracking parameter. Is it? Or is it a variation of the
         | _utf8=[U+2603 SNOWMAN] technique to force ancient IE to use a
         | reasonable POST encoding[1]?
         | 
         | [1] https://stackoverflow.com/q/3222013
        
       | racl101 wrote:
       | Nice! Very nice!
        
       | filipmares wrote:
       | Why not make this the default calling it "Copy Link" and offer a
       | second option "Copy Link With Potential Tracking!!!"?
        
         | netsharc wrote:
         | Huh, let's not do that. If I chose "Copy link", I'd expect an
         | exact copy of the string, not a modified (cleaned) one. What
         | next, an image editor where "Copy image" gives you an enhanced
         | image where e.g. people in the background and imperfections on
         | people's skin are removed?
        
           | LordDragonfang wrote:
           | >What next, an image editor where "Copy image" gives you an
           | enhanced image where [...] imperfections on people's skin are
           | removed
           | 
           | Nope, not "next", TikTok did that already
           | 
           | https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/10/1026074/tiktok-m.
           | ..
        
           | codetrotter wrote:
           | > imperfections on people's skin are removed?
           | 
           | Why stop there? Why not remove the skin altogether :>
        
         | morjom wrote:
         | because "Copy Link" tells the user they are about to copy the
         | entirety of the link.
        
       | TechBro8615 wrote:
       | I wish I had this for Twitter links in iOS Safari. It's so
       | difficult to scroll to the right and delete all the query
       | parameters. I also wish Apple would give me a way to expand the
       | URL bar to a word-wrapped input that takes up half the screen. I
       | can't stand highlighting text in that tiny little box.
        
         | gnicholas wrote:
         | Are there any iOS Safari extensions that do this? Hyperweb
         | comes to mind, though I don't know if they offer this specific
         | feature.
        
         | VoxPelli wrote:
         | Safari have it built in for many pages, all that publish a rel-
         | canonical will see Safari share that URL instead - as a way to
         | avoid sharing AMP URL:s I believe
         | 
         | Bad that Twitter isn't publishing such or is publishing it with
         | tracking
        
           | TechBro8615 wrote:
           | I'm not sure it's even Twitter's fault. Usually it happens
           | when I click an embedded Tweet from a blog post and then copy
           | the URL from the URL bar. It's the blog that adds the
           | tracking data. (Does anyone know why a blog would even care
           | to do that? Does Twitter offer some kind of analytics
           | dashboard where you can segment views of your tweets based on
           | query parameters?)
        
             | jaywalk wrote:
             | Twitter adds some crap on automatically whenever you click
             | "Copy link to Tweet"
             | 
             | Also, they do have an analytics dashboard:
             | https://business.twitter.com/en/help/campaign-measurement-
             | an...
        
         | manwithaplan wrote:
         | > It's so difficult to scroll to the right and delete all the
         | query parameters.
         | 
         | A lot of times, all that's needed is to insert a # character at
         | the right place in the URL, then load that.
        
           | minitech wrote:
           | If you can _get_ to the right place that conveniently,
           | Shift+End Delete works without a page load. But getting their
           | is its own minor inconvenience.
        
         | dantle wrote:
         | I made a Shortcut to strip links. You can add it to the share
         | sheet. It'll give you a new share sheet with the stripped link.
         | Much faster than mashing backspace.
         | 
         | https://www.icloud.com/shortcuts/528c9af856fc46c9a3d164a85e8...
        
         | lapcat wrote:
         | > I wish I had this for Twitter links in iOS Safari.
         | 
         | [self-promotion] My extension StopTheMadness does this:
         | https://apps.apple.com/app/stopthemadness-mobile/id158308293...
        
           | drcongo wrote:
           | I can recommend this. Does lots of other useful things too.
        
           | kilroy123 wrote:
           | Nice. I'm a user and I also recommend it.
        
           | TechBro8615 wrote:
           | I actually have this installed! But I disabled it for some
           | reason that I can't remember; I think the defaults were too
           | aggressive and I meant to come back and configure it more
           | precisely when I had the time. I still need to do that...
           | thanks for making it!
           | 
           | The other extension I can absolutely recommend is Vinegar,
           | which replaces hostile video players like the one on YouTube
           | (which injects JS to close itself if you attempt to use
           | picture-in-picture) with a native HTML5 video element.
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | FYI/YSK:
             | 
             | When youre on a video with forced ads where you cannot skip
             | through them, go PiP on the video and use the arrow keys to
             | scrub left or right...
             | 
             | I discovered this, then talked to a buddy at netflix, and
             | he said that coding for PiP was a pain because PiP doesnt
             | abide by DRM rules.
             | 
             | What would be cool is the ability to pipe a PiP to VLC and
             | then use VLC to save out a video....
        
             | lapcat wrote:
             | > replaces hostile video players like the one on YouTube
             | (which injects JS to close itself if you attempt to use
             | picture-in-picture) with a native HTML5 video element.
             | 
             | StopTheMadness also does this. ;-)
        
               | ezfe wrote:
               | Does it include a quality picker? Vinegar does more than
               | just put a <video> tag in
        
               | lapcat wrote:
               | Yes, check out the link above. Auto-select YouTube
               | highest video quality, show video controls for all sites
               | (not just YouTube), stop autoplaying videos for all sites
               | (which also skips YouTube ads), etc.
        
             | MonkeyMalarky wrote:
             | Does something like that exist for Reddit? Whatever it is
             | they use on their website is a janky piece crap.
        
           | voisin wrote:
           | Looks great! Is the one purchase price for use across iOS and
           | MacOS? Or two separate purchases?
        
             | lapcat wrote:
             | Separate purchases.
        
           | tonylemesmer wrote:
           | Does it work in firefox ios? (Hoping webview makes it work
           | but dont really understand extensions on ios)
        
             | lapcat wrote:
             | No, just Safari.
        
           | nvahalik wrote:
           | Love this extension!
        
       | kragen wrote:
       | I want this feature so much, every time I try to copy a link from
       | Fecebutt or Google and paste it elsewhere. This may be what gets
       | me to switch to Brave.
        
         | jug wrote:
         | If you get the ClearURLs extension for Chromium or Firefox and
         | follow a link with junk at the end, it will strip it. But I
         | couldn't get it to clean what goes into the clipboard and
         | indeed this would be the best.
        
       | codetrotter wrote:
       | I use this sometimes and I love it. I just wish I could configure
       | the browser to make this the default always when I copy a link.
        
       | 1123581321 wrote:
       | This is a good feature. Arc has a slightly better implementation
       | of this. Cmd+shift+C is the copy current tab URL shortcut, and it
       | removes trackers by default and lets you know it's "a clean URL
       | without trackers :)" in the flash notification. I'd like to see
       | Brave similarly make the default copy clean and add a copy with
       | trackers second option.
        
         | andai wrote:
         | A browser with a waiting list.. now I've seen it all!
        
           | jemmyw wrote:
           | Not just a waiting list. You cannot use this browser without
           | signing up for an account.
        
             | imbnwa wrote:
             | Hide my Email? TBF, for people who are high-sprawl but
             | organized, the UI is next-level as it supercedes multiple
             | windows/bookmarks as org tools and offers a number of
             | affordances that minimize the 'manual resource management',
             | if you will, of legacy browser UIs.
        
             | xmprt wrote:
             | It's also your s p a c e to breathe on the internet...
             | Whatever that means.
        
               | presentation wrote:
               | To be fair I'm using Arc and it's the best browser UX
               | I've ever experienced, although it's still Chromium.
        
           | ASalazarMX wrote:
           | For the lazy, clicking [Try it for yourself] asks for your
           | email to notify you when "your spot is ready and waiting!".
           | 
           | https://arc.net/
           | 
           | Must be a responsibly release, don't want too many powerusers
           | flooding the web at once.
        
             | ciwolsey wrote:
             | All I learned from that mess of a site is that Arc is a
             | browser of some kind.
        
             | throwaway742 wrote:
             | >the Browser Company of New York
             | 
             | lol
        
             | jklinger410 wrote:
             | IIRC this is Mac only. Although it is developed on top of
             | Chromium.
             | 
             | I guess Power Users only use Mac.
        
               | LoganDark wrote:
               | > I guess Power Users only use Mac.
               | 
               | Little Snitch and Audio Hijack/Loopback and Sketchapp and
               | iA Writer and Inklet certainly think so. There are no
               | Windows/cross-platform analogues for any of these. No
               | firewall that _suspends_ connections for an interactive
               | prompt, no way to create virtual audio devices or route
               | audio in Windows, no equivalent to Sketch (Figma comes
               | close I guess) and the Windows version of iA Writer is
               | pretty pathetic. And Inklet simply doesn 't have a
               | Windows equivalent even when I have an official Apple
               | Magic Trackpad connected to my computer.
               | 
               | There's just a lot of cool stuff that isn't available for
               | other OSes.
        
               | jraph wrote:
               | > No firewall that suspends connections for an
               | interactive prompt
               | 
               | Didn't ZoneAlarm do that on Windows in the 2000s?
        
               | black_puppydog wrote:
               | not sure about sketchapp and inklet, but the first
               | examples are extremely platform specific to the point of
               | requiring a rewrite for different platforms
        
               | jklinger410 wrote:
               | There is absolutely a form of hipster-ism about
               | publishing Mac only software. The truth is, it started
               | because Mac users are more likely to pay for apps and app
               | subscriptions.
               | 
               | So the ironic part is that it's not as much about
               | aesthetic or infrastructure or even ease of development
               | as it is about economics.
        
               | smsm42 wrote:
               | Finally, the revenge of Windows users for all those years
               | of "sure we support every platform. I mean every Windows
               | platform of course!" (jk of course)
        
               | 1123581321 wrote:
               | They're developing a Windows version right now.
        
               | jklinger410 wrote:
               | Very cool. When they finally develop a Linux version of
               | their Chromium based browser (already cross-platform) I
               | will consider giving it a shot.
        
               | 1123581321 wrote:
               | Sarcasm acknowledged. :) It's okay if you don't like the
               | browser I like.
        
         | jklinger410 wrote:
         | Not every query string in a URL is about tracking. This will
         | break some sites.
         | 
         | EDIT: Correction, they are very conservative with which strings
         | are filtered out. See here: https://github.com/brave/brave-
         | core/blob/master/browser/net/...
        
           | dymk wrote:
           | Where did you read that it removes the whole query string?
        
             | jklinger410 wrote:
             | You're right, after looking in their documentation I found
             | that they are very conservative with which strings they
             | filter out.
             | 
             | They only look for specific KNOWN user-level targeting
             | strings to strip. This is actually a very nuanced route for
             | them to take. Other plugins will just filter out everything
             | following a query.
             | 
             | Here is the fine details for those interested:
             | https://github.com/brave/brave-
             | core/blob/master/browser/net/...
             | 
             | As a marketer, they do mention that they retain Campaign
             | level parameters, however the click ID is more than just a
             | user-level identifier. Many times a click ID is the only
             | thing that survives different environments in order to
             | provide any attribution at all.
             | 
             | In fact, a click ID is much more privacy aware and
             | anonymous in every circumstance than a website giving you
             | your own user ID. All good web platforms generate a unique
             | ID for you, which is not anonymized for the web platform.
             | Whereas the click ID is always anonymized for the web
             | platform. When you combine the two, you get a very basic
             | piece of information: this user clicked this ad. Now those
             | websites will still know who you are as a user, and still
             | know which campaign you came from, but not when you
             | specifically clicked. Wow, what a privacy save!
             | 
             | Removing it does very little to reduce what Google knows
             | about you. Google does not need your click ID. The only
             | time it is used is for conversion attribution, and it is
             | completely anonymized between the ad platform and the
             | marketers who run the campaigns.
             | 
             | So this is mostly just sticking it to the little guy, as
             | large data platforms don't need ad-level click IDs to track
             | you. But if you want to make sure that no marketer ever
             | gets credit for driving you to perform an action, then this
             | is for you!
        
           | 1123581321 wrote:
           | It doesn't strip every query string. It acts as if it has a
           | list of known tracking params, but I haven't investigated the
           | exact mechanism.
        
             | shockeychap wrote:
             | I kinda wish it _did_ remove all querystrings. The vast
             | majority of querystrings are nothing more than tracking and
             | marketing garbage, and I can handle the rare situation
             | where one is needed manually. Stripping from a known list
             | of values just means that marketers will start using random
             | identifiers with clever ingestion code, making this
             | mechanism less useful over time.
        
               | QuercusMax wrote:
               | Stripping all querystrings would break tons of sites,
               | such as this one we're on right now.
        
               | 1123581321 wrote:
               | It's even worse than using random query strings. Last
               | year, Facebook, Amazon and some other sites started using
               | encrypted URLs that can't be decoded and modified before
               | hitting the server. The good news is that this won't work
               | with just an analytics JS snippet, but the technology
               | will get easier to implement and spread over time.
               | https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/07/facebook-
               | is-n...
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | Unfortunately that won't help as it's perfectly possible
               | to add tracking parameters in a static-looking portion of
               | a URL.
               | 
               | Removing all query parameters might encourage that
               | practice, and ultimately even push sites towards creating
               | completely opaque, server-side resolved unique sharing
               | URLs.
        
               | jklinger410 wrote:
               | Very true. This is a nuclear arms race that I'm afraid
               | users will ultimately lose. The kind of fingerprinting
               | that has been used to determine TOR users is what the
               | end-game ultimately looks like. It's already being done
               | anyway. It's very difficult to avoid, and you will not be
               | able to use 90% of the mainstream internet if you do.
        
               | pbhjpbhj wrote:
               | Klipper (KDE's clipboard tool) lets you set up this sort
               | of thing pretty easily. It can take actions when a
               | certain type of content is copied. So, you can match on
               | "^http[^?]*" and "echo %0" (you can call any program,
               | builtins are provided for MIME types, so you can, for
               | example, launch a browser when you copy a URL) as the
               | action will allow you to replace the copied URL
               | automatically/on-request.
        
           | brewdad wrote:
           | I'll take a second attempt using Ctrl+C over always copying
           | the tracking garbage for 90% of URLs.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-09 23:00 UTC)