Deleted browser history; effect on visited sites?

[delamer]

A couple of hours ago, I deleted the browser history on my iPad (Safari) for today and yesterday.

Does the deletion at my end have any effect at the visited sites? I’m asking specifically about sites where I just browsed content and did not log in or leave identifying information (like an e-mail address). I got logged out of sites where I normally stay logged in, like WSJ.com

I assume that the browsed sites will at a minumum have a log that shows they were visited by a device with my IP address at X time on Y date? And that is not erased by any deletions at my end?

(Nothing underhanded going on! I’m not on the dark web or visiting sites connected to the Nazi party. It is just a question that occurred to me.)

[Duckie]

A couple of hours ago, I deleted the browser history on my iPad (Safari) for today and yesterday.

Does the deletion at my end have any effect at the visited sites?

No. You deleted YOUR history on YOUR device. It does not affect websites you have visited.

[sycamore]

A couple of hours ago, I deleted the browser history on my iPad (Safari) for today and yesterday.

Does the deletion at my end have any effect at the visited sites? I’m asking specifically about sites where I just browsed content and did not log in or leave identifying information (like an e-mail address). I got logged out of sites where I normally stay logged in, like WSJ.com

"I got logged out of sites" - what does this mean? Who or what did the "logging out"? Sorry to be nitpicky but details matter.

Do you mean that a consequence of "I deleted the browser history on my iPad" was that you were logged out of sites? Or do you mean that you noticed you were logged out of sites and the cause of such logging out is unknown but coincidental to you deleting the browser history?

"Deleting the browser history" is fairly specific. Can you confirm that that's all you did? Consider how it works with the Chrome browser -- the general action is " Delete browsing data" and you can choose what kinds of data to delete:



It's possible the default choices are to delete not just browsing history but also "cookies and other site data". The latter is what would cause Safari to effectively log you out of sites.

Safari may work in a similar manner; I don't know.

I assume that the browsed sites will at a minumum have a log that shows they were visited by a device with my IP address at X time on Y date? And that is not erased by any deletions at my end?

Correct.

[delamer]

A couple of hours ago, I deleted the browser history on my iPad (Safari) for today and yesterday.

Does the deletion at my end have any effect at the visited sites? I’m asking specifically about sites where I just browsed content and did not log in or leave identifying information (like an e-mail address). I got logged out of sites where I normally stay logged in, like WSJ.com

"I got logged out of sites" - what does this mean? Who or what did the "logging out"? Sorry to be nitpicky but details matter.

Do you mean that a consequence of "I deleted the browser history on my iPad" was that you were logged out of sites? Or do you mean that you noticed you were logged out of sites and the cause of such logging out is unknown but coincidental to you deleting the browser history?

"Deleting the browser history" is fairly specific. Can you confirm that that's all you did? Consider how it works with the Chrome browser -- the general action is " Delete browsing data" and you can choose what kinds of data to delete:



It's possible the default choices are to delete not just browsing history but also "cookies and other site data". The latter is what would cause Safari to effectively log you out of sites.

Safari may work in a similar manner; I don't know.

I assume that the browsed sites will at a minumum have a log that shows they were visited by a device with my IP address at X time on Y date? And that is not erased by any deletions at my end?

Correct.

Safari deletes browsing history and “cookies and permissions” with the method I used.

[gavinsiu]

Sites often leave cookies on your device and when you delete history, you might also delete the cookies. Some site use a cookie to indicated you logged in, so you might need to log back in again. Deleting the cookie might disrupted tracking, so if you don't log into a site like youtube and you delete the cookie, your suggestion might change because the site forget what you view previously.

[sycamore]

...
Safari deletes browsing history and “cookies and permissions” with the method I used.

This explains it.

As gavinsiu explained, cookies are one way to keep track of login status on a site. So deleting your cookies effectively means logging out.

[upwind]

Not clear exactly what you are asking. However, if deleting history includes deleting cookies you may see some minor differences.

As you have already noticed you have been logged out of sites that maintain logins across sessions based on local cookies. You might notice that some website features/configuration (such as “look and feel”) will have changed if you made any custom settings to a site that are saved in cookies (relatively rare). You may find that you get prompt for 2nd factor configuration on some sites that confirm when detecting use of a “new” device.

All of this is based on the local computer. Nothing changes remotely.

[delamer]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

[jebmke]

Sites often leave cookies on your device and when you delete history, you might also delete the cookies. Some site use a cookie to indicated you logged in, so you might need to log back in again. Deleting the cookie might disrupted tracking, so if you don't log into a site like youtube and you delete the cookie, your suggestion might change because the site forget what you view previously.

My understanding is that Safari "delete" is all or nothing. No choice to delete browsing history but keep cookies and passwords. One of the reasons I rarely use it. I've also noticed that it doesn't perform well with some sites. My desktop main browser (except for Google services and financials) is Brave which is tunable. Chrome I use only with Google services and absolutely nothing else, especially not with search -- but it is also tunable. Opera works well with financial sites for me and is also tunable.

One drawback of not using Safari in iOS is that if one programs Shortcuts, non-Safari browsers can be a bit quirky. If Shortcuts are never used, it probably makes no difference.

[torso2500]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

yes site owners can capture IPs of visitors without cookies

[sycamore]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

Yes.

It is certainly possible to have a web site that does not use cookies.

You - via your browser - could visit that web site.

And the web site would know that a visit occurred.

Some of the information about the visit is not stored in or communicated via cookies. For example, there's the IP address of the client that initiated a TCP connection. There's also info stored inside the HTTP request (by the browser) that is communication over that connection.

[jebmke]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

yes site owners can capture IPs of visitors without cookies

I think this may be why I get ads for women's shoes on my device. But it doesn't explain the ads I sometimes get for a new stealth fighter that one of the defense contracts is currently designing or the ads for machine tools like three-axis milling machines. So it may be that their algorithms are not perfect.

[delamer]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

yes site owners can capture IPs of visitors without cookies

Thank you.

But assuming that you don’t enter any identifying information at XYZ — like your name or an e-mail address — all the site owners know is that a device with that IP address visited?

Can the site capture any information based on a random IP address, like physical location?

[delamer]

Is this example correct for a home wifi network with multiple devices?

In the IP address example image above, the network ID is 184.19.243.

However, these devices are differentiated by their host IDs, the last number in the series.

Laptop: 184.19.243.1

TV: 184.19.243.2

Smartphone: 184.19.243.3

Printer: 184.19.243.4

Source: https://www.adjust.com/glossary/ip-address/

[Boglegrappler]

On safari with a mac, you can go to history, and once you get there, if you press and hold the "option key", the menu item that says "clear history" will change to say "clear history and keep website data".

Obviously the default clear history clears more than simply the list of sites you visited. I think it clears the cookies from all the websites in the default mode. Pressing the option key while deleting maintains them.

[upwind]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

As mentioned potentially yes. From a remote website perspective, at a minimum your IP will generally be logged at least temporarily as part of general request logs. These are often ignored. In practice, far more deliberate information is generally collected. Keep in mind when you request a website (by entering it in browser or clicking a link) you are also making a request to every resource embedded in that page as it loads. Most sites are full of measurement, tracking, advertising, and other links that attempt to pull in all sorts of information from your system and link you across sites if possible. Your profile and browsing history is huge business. Not all sites will do this but almost all commercial do. Most tracking is done in interest of presenting “personal/relevant” advertisements. Site operators also are interested in how you interact with their site and relationship maintenance and sales.

In addition, your dns provider (by default generally your internet provider) will know what sites your IP requested. They generally won’t know what pages on a site you viewed over https. An exception to this is if a transparent proxy is in the connection path. These tend to be used by large companies to scan and check data being transferred over encrypted channels. It is essentially a man in the middle attack.

The highest level of insight in regard to general sites visited is held by the ISP because even with dynamic IP assignment they can match IP to internet account for any period of time. If you use a vpn then it is the vpn provider with that sits at that point.

[delamer]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

As mentioned potentially yes. At a minimum your IP will generally be logged at least temporarily as part of general request logs. These are often ignored. In practice, far more deliberate information is generally collected. Keep in mind when you request a website (by entering it in browser or clicking a link) you are also making a request to every resource embedded in that page as it loads. Most sites are full of tracking, advertising, and other links that attempt to pull in all sorts of information from your system and link you across sites if possible. Your profile and browsing history is huge business.

This is helpful. Given all the advertising, I assumed that visited sites were going to try and get as much information about me (or my device/network) as possible.

[jebmke]

Is this example correct for a home wifi network with multiple devices?

In the IP address example image above, the network ID is 184.19.243.

However, these devices are differentiated by their host IDs, the last number in the series.

Laptop: 184.19.243.1

TV: 184.19.243.2

Smartphone: 184.19.243.3

Printer: 184.19.243.4

Source: https://www.adjust.com/glossary/ip-address/

Those are your inside IP addresses. Your gateway uses an external IP address provided by the ISP. I don't think sites know or care what your internal IP address is - it is strictly used to enable an internal network.

[increment]

The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a site that can demonstrate how much information your web browser is coughing out, which can then be used to track you over time.

[physics911]

Be aware that your ISP knows every site you go to, every time. This may not be specifically germain to your question, but you did ask if anyone knows you went to a particular site (paraphrased). The answer is a resounding, yes.

My best friend has worked for ISP's for decades and I can't tell you how many times he has told me about having to provide subpoenaed evidence of internet traffic.

[torso2500]

If you visit site XYZ but XYZ doesn’t plant a cookie on your device, is there anyway for someone examining the traffic for XYZ to know that your device (or IP address, maybe?) visited XYZ?

yes site owners can capture IPs of visitors without cookies

Thank you.

But assuming that you don’t enter any identifying information at XYZ — like your name or an e-mail address — all the site owners know is that a device with that IP address visited?

Can the site capture any information based on a random IP address, like physical location?

There is more information than IP address that can be logged, like information about your device, OS, browser, timezone, language setting, etc. If you access the website from a link then usually the referring page is tracked. This information can be enough to make some educated guesses at a user profile even though it is not PII

[upwind]

Is this example correct for a home wifi network with multiple devices?

In the IP address example image above, the network ID is 184.19.243.

However, these devices are differentiated by their host IDs, the last number in the series.

Laptop: 184.19.243.1

TV: 184.19.243.2

Smartphone: 184.19.243.3

Printer: 184.19.243.4

Source: https://www.adjust.com/glossary/ip-address/

Those are your inside IP addresses. Your gateway uses an external IP address provided by the ISP. I don't think sites know or care what your internal IP address is - it is strictly used to enable an internal network.

As a rule this is the case for home networks. That is, the WAN side is provided by ISP and the router generally NATs everything internal outgoing using that address. This example can certainly work that way. However, this is an interesting example because that network appears to be a publicly routable network. The router and networking could be configured to pass these IPs from device as-is and expose them to the internet without using NAT. So for this example it could work either way.

However, internal networks, especially home, generally use “non-routable” (or more correctly non-publicly routable) IP addresses and behave as described.

[jebmke]

Is this example correct for a home wifi network with multiple devices?

In the IP address example image above, the network ID is 184.19.243.

However, these devices are differentiated by their host IDs, the last number in the series.

Laptop: 184.19.243.1

TV: 184.19.243.2

Smartphone: 184.19.243.3

Printer: 184.19.243.4

Source: https://www.adjust.com/glossary/ip-address/

Those are your inside IP addresses. Your gateway uses an external IP address provided by the ISP. I don't think sites know or care what your internal IP address is - it is strictly used to enable an internal network.

As a rule this is the case for home networks. That is, the WAN side is provided by ISP and the router generally NATs everything internal outgoing using that address. This example can certainly work that way. However, this is an interesting example because that network appears to be a publicly routable network. The router and networking could be configured to pass these IPs from device as-is and expose them to the internet without using NAT. So for this example it could work either way.

However, internal networks, especially home, generally use “non-routable” (or more correctly non-publicly routable) IP addresses and behave as described.

Hmm; seems like a bizarre example; I'd never expose devices like a TV or Printer to an external network.