Hi,I’ve been using DuckDuckGo for quite a while.But I’m currently interested in mulled leta as DDG result is sometimes not good for non-English search.
My question is if using mullvad leta will make me more fingerprintable?
I use Mullvad browser and hardened Firefox on pc,and Brave on mobile.
Fingerprinting would usually be done by the website themselves, so if you trust Mullvad and use the right browsers (which you mostly do) it shouldn’t be an issue. The only “fingerprinting” I could think might apply is traffic analysis which can be mitigated by using Mullvad’s DAITA.
Mullvad Leta is a frontend for Google and Brave Search, acting as an in-between “proxy” as you make searches.
Per their FAQ page:
Your searches are performed by proxy, it is the Leta server that makes calls to the Google or Brave Search API.
Each search that has not already been cached is saved in RAM for 30 days. The idea is that the more searches performed, the larger and more substantial the cached results become, therefore aiding with privacy.
All searches will be stored hashed with a secret in a cache. When you perform a search the cache will be checked first, before determining whether a direct call to Google or Brave Search should be made. Each time the Leta application is restarted (due to an upgrade, or new version) server side, a new secret hash is generated, meaning that all previous search queries are no longer visible to Leta
What could potentially be a unique search would become something that many other users would also search for.
If you’re looking to counter fingerprinting as much as possible, stick with Mullvad Leta on Mullvad Browser as it is its default search engine.
I can’t comment on whether a Leta user is an identifiable marker despite the mitigations claimed by Mullvad.