and/or use the Clear URLs extension.

  • N.E.P.T.R@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    31·
    7 days ago

    Instead of using a whole new extension (which increase your attack surface), just

    ClearURLs extensiom needs the ability to read and modify every link you visit, which is very dangerous. Highly recommend just using uBlock Origin because it can do the same thing.

  • 18107@aussie.zoneEnglish
    13·
    6 days ago

    Some websites do have required information after the ? which is needed for linking to the correct page/section.

    If you’re not sure, try deleting it and pasting the modified link in a new tab. If it doesn’t work, try again with one additional argument (the text separated by ? or &) at a time until the link works.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      3·
      6 days ago

      also, like, look at what the text is. If it says ?tracking=8kk90902q then it’s probably a tracking string, if it says ?video=k8a9r it’s probably important to get the actual content you’re linking to.

  • onionsinmypores@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    16·
    7 days ago

    Another useful rule:
    If you are on a gargantuan site with millions of unique content items, and the link is unreasonably short, it is likely a personalized link tied to your account.
    Facebook does this, I think TikTok too, which might even show the viewer which account generated the link, hence doxing your real identity.

    Always try to get the content link from the web url through a private browser window, instead of clicking dedicated “Share” buttons on pages.

    Examples (from memory, so inaccurate) :
    facebook.com/share/GPQR221
    instead of
    facebook.com/video/10000021928282/…

    YouTube is an exception to this rule.

  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orgEnglish
    5·
    6 days ago

    The ? part (parameters) sometimes do play a role. But by removing parts like ?maxheight=300, you can sometimes get higher quality images.

    Then there’s the # part (section). If you’re referencing a section in a long document, check if there’s a ToC linking to headings, or a # link next to them. For PDFs, #page=X usually works. BTW it is mostly harmless: just identify the HTML element ID to scroll into view and most browsers don’t send it to the server (but JavaScript can access it).

  • Hundun@beehaw.orgEnglish
    7·
    7 days ago

    Sharing a tracked link is a netizens equivalent of sneezing without covering your face. Unhygienic

  • Holla@feddit.orgEnglish
    4·
    7 days ago

    I’ve been seeing youtube links with an &is=, is that the same thing or something else?

    • Fontasia@feddit.nlEnglish
      1·
      6 days ago

      So you’ll see these refers in lots of sites, and it’s likely just statistics collection. If the referring text is always the same, it’s that the site legitimately just wants to know hwo many people are clicking a particular link.

      You’ll see it really often in email newsletters that they will end in ref=fromemail or ref=fronsocial when posted to social media. On the database side, all the tracking information would be aggregated under the same one.

      As with everything, this can be used in a harmless way or more maliciously, but at end of the day, all it helps is identify where particular traffic is coming from. For YouTube, the ID is connected to who shared the link, when it was shared, etc. It attempts to use that information against the person who clicked the link to try and work out better ads and YouTube recommendations for both of them, so you’ll stay in YouTube longer and see more ads.

    • tb_@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      6 days ago

      +1 for urlchecker.

      You can set it to open any link first (as if it were you primary browser), then have it link you through to whatever app.