Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

fourthamendment.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 172 posts

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#11

Post by Hnrobert42 »

autoexec wrote: post #6

> Location History is turned off by default, so a user must take several affirmative steps before Google begins tracking and storing his Location History data. Do people really think Google isn't tracking location data without this setting enabled? How would anyone (save for a whistleblower) know? Location history seems like the data Google lets you collect/see for yourself, and not the totality of location data (whi…

I completely distrust Google. I have no Google apps on my iPhone. I don't use any Google services.

But I do not believe they have any other identity-linked location data. The way you would know is that there would be an article about the police requesting it.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#12

Post by vineyardmike »

autoexec wrote: post #6

> Location History is turned off by default, so a user must take several affirmative steps before Google begins tracking and storing his Location History data. Do people really think Google isn't tracking location data without this setting enabled? How would anyone (save for a whistleblower) know? Location history seems like the data Google lets you collect/see for yourself, and not the totality of location data (whi…

> Do people really think Google isn't tracking location data without this setting enabled? How would anyone (save for a whistleblower) know?

Frankly I think that Google wont track me if I flip the bit (bugs not withstanding). Maybe I’m a fool. Do I trust mega corps? No, but I trust them enough to not blatantly lie when there’d be huge legal repercussions.

They’re a massive corporation with tons of lawyers. They have an huge reputational risk, and they are already known to track a lot of data. Ignoring the user would be a massive violation. I’m sure there is massive legal penalty to this, enough to make the company care about being honest. You can find the most useless crap they stored it you do a data takeout request, so what’re the odds that entire teams of people have been secretly working on something violating laws and agreements and everyone including legal has just turned a blind eye?

Everywhere I’ve worked required privacy and legal reviews just to touch data that could be a location, nevermind store or use it associated with a user. Frankly the lack of whistleblowers or leaks should be a massive sign that it’s not happening. Google has been terrible at avoiding leaks, and everyone working there seems to be jaded after the layoffs rocked the company.

Regarding the “gay bar” anecdotes - I think there are some weak protections around “derivative data” in some jurisdictions but this is likely a gap in laws. There is a chance that it could be considered derived location and be purged too.

Ps totally agree on the point about police abuse though.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#13

Post by lokar »

ranger_danger wrote: post #8
lokar wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sharing your personal information with a 3rd party reduces your claim to privacy and 4th amendment rights.

pretty sure one of the 47 agree buttons people blindly click on while using their phone has given them the permission already

I mean, you have no (or limited) 4th amendment rights in regards to information you have given or shared with someone else.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#15

Post by autoexec »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #11
autoexec wrote: post #6

> Location History is turned off by default, so a user must take several affirmative steps before Google begins tracking and storing his Location History data. Do people really think Google isn't tracking location data without this setting enabled? How would anyone (save for a whistleblower) know? Location history seems like the data Google lets you collect/see for yourself, and not the totality of location data (whi…

I completely distrust Google. I have no Google apps on my iPhone. I don't use any Google services. But I do not believe they have any other identity-linked location data. The way you would know is that there would be an article about the police requesting it.

> The way you would know is that there would be an article about the police requesting it.

I think police just send requests to google for location info without specifying how that data was obtained. It's either, "Tell us everything you know about the location of this user between timestamp one and timestamp two", or "Tell us everything you know about all persons within however many miles of this location between timestamp one and timestamp two" and they don't bother sending requests like "Give us the data from your Location Reporting feature" or "Give us all the data from your Find My Phone feature" or "Give us all the data from your Nearby Connections API"

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#16

Post by acomjean »

autoexec wrote: post #10
ta8645 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mother was told that she spent over 200 hours shopping last month. When she looked into it, Google had tracked all the time spent at the retail store she operates. It was amusing and annoying at the same time. She never asked Google to track her location.

Told by Google? Are they giving people stats like that? How did she get the message?

They send an email.

“You're receiving this email because you turned on Location History, a Google Account-level setting that creates Timeline, a personal map of your visited places, routes, and trips. You can view, edit, and delete this data anytime in Timeline.

Timeline is changing. To avoid losing visits and routes, update your settings by December 8, 2024.“ ……

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#17

Post by vineyardmike »

jmward01 wrote: post #9

Missing from this is the reality that the modern world increasingly requires using these applications. It is meaningless to present an option you are forced to agree to. Additionally there is, to me, a big difference between me enabling an app to use my data for the service I believe it provides and them using it for everything else.

> enabling an app to use my data for the service I believe it provides and them using it for everything else.

I completely agree, but I think we need to push society away from requiring for profit products into our life, or at least recognize that they have an association cost to the user. What is the reasonable expectation of a business to profit off a product that we’ve deemed “required”? Who would make or support a product they can’t profit on?

In the EU, they required Facebook to offer a no-tracking version of the product, which meta replied by making a paid tier. Then they required Facebook to not charge for their no-tracking version. So why should facebook stay in the EU if it can’t profit from providing a service? While no one will shed a tear over Meta’s business, it is a massive way for people to connect with each other. Google Maps could theoretically suffer the same fate - and free access to maps seems like a public good. YouTube is another example that can be for the public good due to its educational content. The list of products that are “free” and probably good for society is huge now thanks to effective online advertising.

I don’t want us to shed a tear for billionaire-corporations profit margins, but instead address that we’ve come to rely on them and they probably won’t be altruistic about watching their profits legislated away.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#18

Post by gruez »

jmward01 wrote: post #9

Missing from this is the reality that the modern world increasingly requires using these applications. It is meaningless to present an option you are forced to agree to. Additionally there is, to me, a big difference between me enabling an app to use my data for the service I believe it provides and them using it for everything else.

>Missing from this is the reality that the modern world increasingly requires using these applications

From the second paragraph in the linked article:

>Location History is turned off by default, so a user must take several affirmative steps before Google begins tracking and storing his Location History data. [...] Roughly one-third of active Google users have enabled Location History.

This is specifically about the opt-in location history service, not some sort of opt-out/mandatory location reporting that's on android phones.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#19

Post by skybrian »

autoexec wrote: post #6

> Location History is turned off by default, so a user must take several affirmative steps before Google begins tracking and storing his Location History data. Do people really think Google isn't tracking location data without this setting enabled? How would anyone (save for a whistleblower) know? Location history seems like the data Google lets you collect/see for yourself, and not the totality of location data (whi…

That link is a story from 2020 about a geofence warrant. It appears that around the end of last year, Google changed their system to store location on the device (with optional encrypted backups), so warrants like that won't work anymore. More info:

Is This the End of Geofence Warrants? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/12/end-geofence-warrants

It might not be completely over. There might be other other location stored somewhere. But, it's important to celebrate the win when something like this happens.

Re: No reasonable expectation of privacy in one's Google location data

#20

Post by gruez »

ranger_danger wrote: post #8
lokar wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sharing your personal information with a 3rd party reduces your claim to privacy and 4th amendment rights.

pretty sure one of the 47 agree buttons people blindly click on while using their phone has given them the permission already

Source? According to the article it's presented to the user in pretty straightforward language:

>Before he can activate the setting, however, Google always presents him language that explains the basics of the service.

Moreover, most people did not blindly click through all the prompts:

>Roughly one-third of active Google users have enabled Location History.

Post reply on HN