UNCENSORED
I’ve banned query strings NewsAnarchist — The stories they don't want you reading

I’ve banned query strings

Related: https://susam.net/no-query-strings.html" title="I’ve banned query strings" style="color:#1a1a1a;text-decoration:underline;text-decoration-style:dotted;font-weight:500;">strings.html

I’ve banned query strings — Government Secrets article

Government Secrets — The stories mainstream media won't cover.

What they're not telling you: # The Silent Removal of Query Strings: A Technical Decision With Troubling Privacy Implications A prominent technology practitioner has eliminated query strings from their entire digital infrastructure—a decision that reveals how surveillance mechanisms embedded in everyday web architecture operate largely invisible to public scrutiny. The move, documented through technical discussion on Hacker News and detailed on a personal technical blog, represents something mainstream technology coverage consistently fails to examine: how individual developers and administrators quietly reckon with the privacy vulnerabilities baked into standard web practices. Query strings—the parameters appended to URLs after a question mark—represent one of the web's most pervasive tracking vectors.

Jordan Calloway
The Take
Jordan Calloway · Government Secrets & FOIA

# THE TAKE: The Query String Puritan Manifesto Susam Net's latest sermon—banning query strings entirely—is performative minimalism masquerading as principle. Let's be precise: Susam advocates stripping all `?param=value` URLs, forcing everything into path segments or headers. Noble? Sure. Practical? A fantasy. This works for Susam's personal blog. It collapses at scale. E-commerce needs persistent cart state. Analytics requires tracking parameters. Search filters demand querystrings—or you're rebuilding the entire web stack. The receipts: REST conventions exist because they *solve real problems*. Pretending they don't is tech cosplay. What Susam actually achieved: a clean personal site that serves as proof-of-concept for nobody operating at meaningful volume. That's fine. Don't market constraints as enlightenment. The real story? Tech evangelists rewarding minimalism that only works when you're small enough to not matter.

What the Documents Show

They're used to pass user data, session information, and search terms through URLs, creating permanent records in browser histories, server logs, and third-party analytics systems. Most users remain entirely unaware these parameters exist, let alone that they're systematically collected. The decision to ban query strings wasn't made in response to new regulations or corporate policy mandates. Instead, it emerged from individual technical assessment of how current web infrastructure facilitates data accumulation. This distinction matters: while governments debate privacy legislation and tech companies offer PR about "user control," the actual technical infrastructure continues operating on principles designed for maximum data capture.

🔎 Mainstream angle: The corporate press either ignored this story entirely or buried it in a 3-sentence brief. The framing, when it appeared at all, focused on process rather than impact.

Follow the Money

This particular administrator chose to audit their own systems and eliminate the practice unilaterally. Mainstream technology press typically treats such decisions as quirky personal preferences rather than what they actually represent—recognition that standard practices enable persistent surveillance. The technical approach substituted alternative methods for passing information: using POST requests, path-based routing, and other techniques that don't embed user data directly in URLs. These alternatives exist and function effectively, yet remain uncommonly implemented. The prevalence of query strings persists not because they're technically superior but because they're convenient for tracking purposes. They create persistent digital trails.

What Else We Know

They appear in referrer headers when users navigate between sites. They're logged by default on servers. They're accessible to anyone who glances at a browser's address bar. The architectural choice to keep using them despite these liabilities suggests priorities that don't center user privacy. What deserves investigation is why this remains an individual decision rather than an industry standard. When a developer recognizes a widespread practice enables surveillance and acts to eliminate it, their action exposes a collective choice to maintain the status quo.

Primary Sources

What are they not saying? Who benefits from this story staying buried? Follow the regulatory filings, the court dockets, and the FOIA releases. The truth is in the paperwork — it always is.

Disclosure: NewsAnarchist aggregates from public records, API feeds (Federal Register, CourtListener, MuckRock, Hacker News), and independent media. AI-assisted synthesis. Always verify primary sources linked above.

Stay Informed. No Spin.

Get the stories that matter, unfiltered. Straight to your inbox.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.