I mean surely mobile phone operators already have this information? I never hear about them being subpoenaed or attempting to deny requests, makes me think the make this information fully available.
Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
31–40 of 125 posts
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#32Moxie Marlinspike has an interesting analysis on this: https://twitter.com/moxie/status/1248707315626201088
He objects to two things:
1. Doing it globally would require download of too much data, thus (contra promise of the spec) location data will have to enter. However, from what I can tell, that could be very coarse data, on the level of country and/or time zone (thus, not even necessitating access to GPS location data). I don’t see it as a major problem.
2. The “prank” danger: someone just pressing “I’m infected” for fun. One could introduce a tiered system where “I’m infected” requires some sort of authentication from a hospital/lab (a QR code on positive test results for example). There would also need to be a tier for “I have symptoms”, and yes, that could be abused/“pranked”.
Would be interesting to see a deeper analysis on both points. I don’t think they’re deal breakers.
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#33They are trying to prevent both millions of deaths and and worst economic collapse in modern age. Privacy isn't as important. Fight this thing when corona-virus is over.
[deleted]
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly the kind of dumb mentally the government wants, and you fell right into the trap. They always use situations like that to push bad stuff that won't be easy to ditch later...
How many deaths is worth the increased privacy?
That's a good question. It depends on how many deaths would the increased privacy save. In the future it won't be as easy to burn the papers documenting whatever group needs saving before the invasion. On the other hand, a lot of it is already in so many private systems, that this likely makes little difference.
I'm not even sure I'm against the current application, but the question is not a simple one.
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#35> In other words, certain governments or companies ... can create an app that report the fact that they have been close to a person of interest in the last few weeks. So this assumes that any random app installed by a user will have open access to the contact database? That seems unlikely to me, but I have not read the full spec.
Governments don't need it. The model suggested links nearby bluetooth mac addresses which get linked to the phones IMEI, and governments already have multitudes of legal ways to link names to IMEIs.
Cell tower based contact tracking is already used to infer someone's social graph and pattern-of-life. Bluetooth association data - even with opaque tokens - can easily be correlated with cell tower movement to refine CO-TRAVELER style analysis.
Cell-tower-resolution analysis is already very powerful - it can trivially reveal someone's associations and overall behavior. When correlated with short-range proximity data, I suspect the same analysis might reveal behavioral details within a organization ("which meetings you attend" instead of merely "what address you work at").
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-t...
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/12/meet-co-traveler-nsas-...
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#36I'm afraid someone has to tell the author that what is already possible is worse than the concerns raised here.
This technology is actually an effort to not use the available methods that would ignore privacy.
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#37Disagree.
The argument seems to be: the spec is fine and presents little danger, but if an app went rogue, or a government mandated an app with further capabilities, then it would be problematic. Yeah, sure. But that also describes the status quo, and everyone still carries their smartphone around.
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Governments don't need it. The model suggested links nearby bluetooth mac addresses which get linked to the phones IMEI, and governments already have multitudes of legal ways to link names to IMEIs.
Where did you read that it links to the phone's MAC Address/IMEI? I can't find IMEI being mentioned in any of Apple's spec documents.
There isn't any IMEI linkage. I think the post you reply to is implying the link between Bluetooth MAC address to IMEI could be established by a state actor.
That isn't the case though, due to Bluetooth MAC address randomisation, which the paper does address - the 10-minutely identifiers advertised are updated in sync with the local device updating its own MAC address, to prevent correlation between the last MAC address and next one.
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#39The technology used for this is the same as for locating your lost device and takes care of privacy in a very smart way, more info: https://www.wired.com/story/apple-find-my-cryptography-bluet... "Apple says an elaborate rotating key scheme will soon let you track down your stolen laptop, but not let anyone track you. Not even Apple."
I'm sorry if a one word dismissal is too confronting for those who know absolutely nothing about what has been going on in dragnet surveillance in silicon valley. But see all these words I'm writing? They don't change the fact that it is impossible to be cynical enough about such fatuous claims. You'd have to be stunningly ignorant to give them more than a second of credulous thought.
Apple are not the good guys or anything like it. Trust Apple to secure you from anyone? You're utterly insane of you do.
> "but not let anyone track you. Not even Apple."
Bullshit is about the most polite response such a claim should be received with. There is not enough bile in the world for it.
Better?
Re: Stop the Apple and Google contact tracing platform
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly the kind of dumb mentally the government wants, and you fell right into the trap. They always use situations like that to push bad stuff that won't be easy to ditch later...
People can't literally exit their houses right now. Much more basic freedoms are taken. If you think ditching that later will be hard, ditching it now when it's desperately needed is impossible.
that policy is easy to understand can be reverted easily
this is not true for surveillance systems