Chrome 64 for Android cuts URLs automatically when you share them
Links are the lifeblood of the Internet. They point from one site to another and are often used to connect similar resources with each other, for attribution, or research.
Links can be clean, e.g., https://www.ghacks.net/ or they can be what many consider messy, e.g., https://www.amazon.de/b/ref=unrec_bubbler_2_en?_encoding=UTF8&node=1624983031&ref=unrec_bubbler_2_en&pf_rd_m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&pf_rd_s=&pf_rd_r=3YBY614EJ389QBEFV3XP&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=c6c82179-3640-43e2-a115-60abf979c755&pf_rd_i=desktop.
While you still see that the second link points to Amazon based on the domain part of it, it is not clear what all these other parameters do that are attached to the link.
When Twitter appeared on the scene, services that turned a long URL into a shorter version followed because of the service's character limit. These services were useful on mobile devices as well as you had little screen space to display text. Even Google started its own link shortening service, but all had in common that the short link pointed to the long link without changing it in any way.
Google implemented a new feature in Google Chrome 64 for Android that changes that. When users use the share functionality on the device, links get cleaned up automatically.
Ryan Whitwam on Android Police suggests that the link cleaning has something to do with canonical links. Pages should have canonical links attached to them which point to a specific URL. A canonical link defines the main URL for content using the HTML tag rel="canonical", e.g. <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.ghacks.net/2008/02/18/clipboard-caching-utility/" />
Links may have parameters attached to them, and it is sometimes difficult for search engines to determine the primary URL for content because of that. The canonical tag helps as webmasters may use it to set the primary URL for content using it.
Anyway, if you use the share menu in Chrome 64 on Android, you will notice that long messy links with lots of parameters may get cut. Amazon is probably a prime example for that, and it appears that Google uses canonical information if available to cut the link.
The canonical link points to the same resource, but it may omit information. Link anchors are stripped which means that users who open the link start at the top of the resource and not at the position the link anchor refers to. Affiliate links get stripped as well which may hurt webmasters who use them to earn revenue.
On the other hand, tracking information, for example, Google Analytics data, may be removed as well in the process.
Chrome on Android users can copy the full link but not by using the share menu. A long-tap on the URL in the address bar displays an option to copy the entire URL so that it can be shared in its entirety.
Closing Words
I have to admit that I'm not in favor of web browsers changing links on their own as it takes away control from users. Admittedly, Chrome users can still copy the full URL at this point in time and the process may deal with tracking links on top of that.
Now You: What's your take on this feature?
- Google Chrome experiment displays only the domain in the urlbar
- How to tell if a shortened link is secure in 2015
- Unshorten: speed up the opening of short URLs on Android
I guess Softonic is also getting money from Google.
Wait till Shaun discovers chrome://flags/ and then the real how-to chrome article flooding will start…
I don’t think so. The real summary. If you need to use Chrome use it in Incognito Mode because it keeps track of your browsing history. Use Edge for your normal browsing. Edge keeps track of your browsing history for saving puppies:) Typical tricks, badmouthing the main competitor.
Really Shaun your writing “The Dark Web Awaits!” is the dark mode the same as the dark web?
Maybe dark mode was a better title?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_web
Or Brave shortcut with “-tor” parameter at the end.
The problem, is that I’m not sure which is less dangerous – Chrome or Tor?
Question marks after a declarative sentence is bad Grammer. See the headline. To use a question mark simply change the wording to a sentence, such as “How do you……”
@Shaun thanks for the articles!
“One of the best things about using Google Chrome is it keeps track of your browsing history.”
Considering the article topic I assume you mean browsing history in a broader sense, including things like tracking storage. Well even if that comment was restricted to browsing history only, not only it’s not Chrome specific but rather universal among browsers, but Chrome would instead be specific in making keeping history the worst possible feature among browsers. Because while most of the browsers (Chrome and Firefox for instance) misuse browsing history by exploiting it commercially for things like personalized advertising, so the more is kept the better for them, Chrome excels at it by uploading it unencrypted to Google servers often without the user even knowing.
“This mode disables local storage of site data, cookies, and browsing history.”
This is false. You are still being tracked by web sites (by local storage, cookies…) during your private browsing session, it just ends at the end of the session by a wiping of the tracking storage. Firefox has the same issue, and both by design. From:
https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/7440301
“Cookies and site data are remembered while you’re browsing, but deleted when you exit Incognito mode.”
In fact, if it works like in Firefox, the tracking storage is even hidden to the user in the UI during private browsing but still here, creating the illusion that it is actually disabled, and even technical users often fall for this. The ability to limit, clean, auto-clean tracking storage, for instance with extensions, may also be limited in this mode. Personally I do not use it because it’s not private enough for this reason, giving up control on cookies ; I use normal mode with privacy tweaks.
A consequence is that browsers like Tor Browser that use mandatory permanent private browsing mode suffer from the same problem. In fact some update went further and totally removed the ability to block cookies and other tracking storage in the UI, while it’s still possible in Firefox in private browsing.
In private browsing modes a bit like in Tor Browser it seems that there is an underlying philosophy that it doesn’t matter that you every tiniest action is being scrutinized, analyzed, and used back against you by evil actors as long as there isn’t your real life name attached to the process. Personally, I disagree. This “loophole” is being heavily abused by surveillance capitalists in many other ways currently.
“One misconception people have is their data is kept private when using incognito mode. You should know that you can still be tracked and attacked by third parties. Your ISP (Internet Service Provider) can track your browsing history and block local websites according to your geography.”
I don’t think that the most common misconception about private browsing is that it would act like an antivirus and block attacks that target vulnerabilities.
What’s often misunderstood is rather that a lot of this mode aims at protecting from other users of the same computer, being a sort of “porn mode” for example. From the same Google reference:
“When you browse privately, other people who use the device won’t see your history.”
A typical example being the browsing history wipe, while such history is not accessible to web sites anyway, but could be to other local users. (well as discussed above it’s also accessible to browser companies while it shouldn’t be, and additionally for anti-user purposes, but that’s another issue). Or the cookies being stored in memory instead of on disk, which may address yet other privacy issues due to local attacks.
However it is also useful to partly limit web tracking (I would not call this “third party” as the author writes because this obviously also includes first party ie the browsed site) in addition to protecting from other local users, by wiping tracking storage at the end of the session. With the caveat above that during the session itself, tracking storage is not disabled. There are also typically other measures that are directed against tracking by web sites exclusively, that are enforced in private browsing mode.
And finally there is all the tracking by sites that happens without using the tracking storage itself, such as through fingerprinting or the IP address ; wiping storage at the end of the session won’t help with that, unless using Tor Browser.
Why use an incognito mode when you can use browsers with a pre-installed web proxy. The UtopiaP2P ecosystem browser is the best way for me to surf the web anonymously. If, like me, you value your anonymity and privacy, then I recommend using this browser.