No. You can raise concerns about a potential vulnerability without having identified a specific real-world method of exploitation.

A privacy-focused search should not potentially reveal to others that you searched something. My examples prove the possibility that it can do that. I’m sure there’s other examples that are less “weird”.

It was just an example but ok, let’s fix it.

You want to see if someone is nosy so you lie and tell them you were arrested in 2006. You check and see “John Doe arrest 2006” or “John Doe 2006 arrest” is cached.

You get the idea.

Unless the terms include a name or location. Plus Leta is not widely used.

Suppose you tell someone in secret that you were arrested. You know they use Leta, so you look up “John Doe arrest” later and see that it was just recently cached. You only told one person so it must have been them. You now know what someone searched because they used Leta.

I don’t like how it tells you when the results were cached. You can tell if and when a query was searched for by someone else.

https://www.malibal.com/legal/terms/

This is so hilariously unhinged. Fun starts at “Geographical Restrictions”