• burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      I judge people based on whether they can understand youtube (which you should be changing to invidious or something else anyway) urls. It’s a useful and very short way to see if people have ever paid attention to repeated patterns. The moment I saw the t=XYs, I was amazed.

  • Memetic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    It’s not always nefarious.

    I work for a non-profit. Sometimes it’s helpful to understand the click rate on a mass message.

    We don’t provide data to third parties and use a self-hosted oss analytics platform.

    So I think folks should understand tracking and manage it but it’s not all bad. Just almost always bad. Really bad.

    Worse: a lot of links can’t be fixed or modified since they use click-through services to obscure the destination.

    • Soulcreator@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      32 minutes ago

      I’m a web developer in a marketing department and agreed UTM tags aren’t really nefarious. We generally use them to track campaigns, and to see the effectiveness of our paid campaigns. (As in how much of a return on investment did we have, are people continuing to traverse the site after hitting the landing page, etc) That said those codes generally don’t give us any info about the user other than what parts of the site you are hitting, (which we can find out through other means anyway). There are tools out there which can give us a creepy amount of data about the users on the site, but UTMs aren’t it.

      Removing them when sending out links is good practice as you probably only really need a fraction of the characters in order to get to the site, so your links are cleaner, you look like less of an idiot, and ironically marketers will end up having cleaner data (I doubt you care about this, but it’s true.)

      That said, if you really want to prevent sites from getting your data when browsing turning off JavaScript in your browser would probably have the biggest impact.

  • Muehe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    44 minutes ago

    PSA if you are worried about link parameters giving away where you came from, you should really be worried about HTTP Referrer headers, which are of course turned on by default in most browsers. Be advised turning them off may break some (parts of) certain websites, but most still work fine in my experience.

    In Firefox go to about:config page and set network.http.sendRefererHeader to 0.

  • Tick Dracy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    On iOS / iPadOS , you can use a Siri Shortcut called Clean URLs.

    Just share the URL with the shortcut, through the share sheet option, and your clean url is automatically copied into the clipboard.

    • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Actually, it’s a a bit of a shitpost. Anything after the ‘?’ is an argument for the html request. Can and is used for tracking, but is also used for website functionality.

      • Master167@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        IMO, any developer who uses URL parameters for required functionality is short sighted. They should use the path as required parameters.

  • Samsy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    There are URL shortener Apps on F-Droid. Simple share the link to this app and get a short link without this privacy mess.

  • danA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    This is kinda true but also kinda fear mongering. UTM parameters are just to track where you clicked the link from. They’re usually not dynamic, and don’t contain anything about you personally. The example in the screenshot utm_source=newsletter is probably added to all links in a company’s newsletter email, so they can tell that people get to the page via the newsletter.

    • PNW clouds@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      As someone who has link tracking in our business, yes, some of the stuff after the ? isn’t nefarious tracking, like the utm mentioned above.

      All the “list-unsubscribe” options you may have noticed starting about a year ago, are actually required to be there for any company that sends out any kind of email newsletter over a certain threshold. (Lists around 5k or more)

      If the unsubscribe links aren’t there, with the required url-encoded parameters (along with some other requirements with DNS) the email will not be delivered to any of the majors (google, yahoo/aol, hotmail, big ISPs) and we get blocked.

      The unsubscribe parameters are being tracked, yes, but we have to have them so we can unsubscribe you “in one click” We are not allowed to require you to sign in to unsubscribe you. (Not that we ever did that, but now there must be a one-click option.)

      (We used to just be two clicks to unsubscribe off an encoded link. Click -> this you? If yes, click -> you are now unsubscribed. Or sign-in and manage subscriptions without an encoded link.)

      Again, the point is that not all url encoded tracking is nefarious. Some of it is now required to try and minimize spam and nefarious emails.

      Source: https://craft.postmark-testing.com/blog/2024-gmail-yahoo-email-requirements

  • gerald_eliasweb@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I did not know what those were for before seeing this but I remeber seeing “source=chat_gpt” next to a link to a source in a news article and thought that it was odd.

    • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 minutes ago

      That just means that the idiot writing the article got the link provided to them by chatgpt during their research. All it does is tell the website that you visited that you followed a link from the given source. They can aggregate the data from all visitors for metrics, to see where they lag behind in exposure. But they can’t associate users to each other with this method.

      Unlike the “igsh” tag in instagram post/reel urls, which when opened, will immediately create a popup stating “join <user that shared the URL with you> on Instagram today!”

  • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I usually just do it because shorter links look better than 30 lines of crap

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Right? The fact that this is an extra bit of tracking information I don’t want makes this an easy sell for anyone looking for a reason to do this, but for me it’s because it just makes links uglier.