The context of the news was a security researcher conducting an audit of the app. If DDG were, as the GP claimed, performing tracking on behalf of MS then it would be more concerning since there is a difference between performing tracking on behalf of a third-party company and merely excluding them from being blocked via a content blocker that most mobile browsers lack anyway.
A mobile app has much more freedom to do what it likes so if this was the worst that occurred in an audit I'm not of the opinion this mark against them is enough to change my use of them. Many things carry some compromise so one has to weigh if an alternative is better. Use of Firefox by default has Mozilla tracking (hence why some mobile forks exists, including one I use), analytics for sponsored links, non-disableable domain name auto-completion by partners, while use of Kagi search is directly tied to an IRL identity via payment.
For me, I'm comfortable using uBlock Origin on both Desktop and Mobile (via a Firefox fork) unless more egregious facts present themselves.
