51–60 of 85 posts
How is this "for the first time?" I saw a well established company demonstrating this technology 5 years ago. They were selling it on being able to either track your employees (this was gov fwiw) or other people in your building. They could do it both through WiFi and Bluetooth and uniquely identify you. While I think this technology is concerning, I'm confused what's new here and trying to read through the marketing…
This is generally old news. Philz Coffee in Palo Alto, CA and major department stores in the US have been doing this for years to track foot traffic. If you don't want to be tracked, turn off BT and Wifi and demand the protocol stds body and mfgrs support even stronger randomized hw addresses.
If your phone is transmitting radio signals it is identifiable and trackable. A smart phones' primary feature and defining feature is transmitting radio signals. I don't think anyone is surprised at these "anonymous" bluetooth functions being deanonymized. But at least bluetooth beacons aren't going to go very far. Multi-lateration of cell phone radio transmission via precise shared clocks at the base stations gives…
To private purchasers?
For 2-5 years?
No need for a judge issued warrant?
Just sold?
If your phone is transmitting radio signals it is identifiable and trackable. A smart phones' primary feature and defining feature is transmitting radio signals. I don't think anyone is surprised at these "anonymous" bluetooth functions being deanonymized. But at least bluetooth beacons aren't going to go very far. Multi-lateration of cell phone radio transmission via precise shared clocks at the base stations gives…
> In the USA this stored by telcos for 2-5 years and is often sold to both private and government purchasers. To private purchasers? For 2-5 years? No need for a judge issued warrant? Just sold?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the USA this stored by telcos for 2-5 years and is often sold to both private and government purchasers. To private purchasers? For 2-5 years? No need for a judge issued warrant? Just sold?
yes, a private company that has bought the information can just chose to share it for a fee with anybody it likes. Why would a judge be involved in that?
> It’s the first time researchers have demonstrated it’s feasible to track individuals using Bluetooth wat.jpg Google scholar has papers going back at least 18 years on this.
I wish the iPhone would not re-enable Bluetooth automatically the next day when it is manually disabled.
If your phone is transmitting radio signals it is identifiable and trackable. A smart phones' primary feature and defining feature is transmitting radio signals. I don't think anyone is surprised at these "anonymous" bluetooth functions being deanonymized. But at least bluetooth beacons aren't going to go very far. Multi-lateration of cell phone radio transmission via precise shared clocks at the base stations gives…
> In the USA this stored by telcos for 2-5 years and is often sold to both private and government purchasers. To private purchasers? For 2-5 years? No need for a judge issued warrant? Just sold?
I can't find the article because Google search terms for stuff like "locating any phone by number" are SEOed to death by scammers trying to exploit would-be stalkers
edit: found it https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/05/tracking-firm-locationsm...
How is this "for the first time?" I saw a well established company demonstrating this technology 5 years ago. They were selling it on being able to either track your employees (this was gov fwiw) or other people in your building. They could do it both through WiFi and Bluetooth and uniquely identify you. While I think this technology is concerning, I'm confused what's new here and trying to read through the marketing…
This new report works around that.