Live data from Hacker News

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

fourthamendment.com

91–100 of 172 posts

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

#91
post #78
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the possibility that the average person doesn't care that much about privacy? That's entirely consistent with other things you can observe, like the lack of response to the Snowden leaks, or how commonly excuses like "nothing to hide" are invoked.

> Have you considered the possibility that the average person doesn't care that much about privacy? it's not that they don't care - they didnt think they need to care. There's a big difference. Implicit trust in the data usage is the key here. On the one hand, this implicit trust means the customer is a really good one. But abuses of this trust is inevitable imho, and eventually, it will be made public if it happened…

And to me this actually also makes it very qurlestionable, whether actual consent existed, or someone simple abused their uninformedness.

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

#92
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…

They're missing the profit/ altruism of me just giving them £€$ right out of the gate so as not to have ads thrown at me.

I just don't like ads (and tracking).

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

#93
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the possibility that the average person doesn't care that much about privacy? That's entirely consistent with other things you can observe, like the lack of response to the Snowden leaks, or how commonly excuses like "nothing to hide" are invoked.

> Have you considered the possibility that the average person doesn't care that much about privacy? I have. I considered it in depth and did a good deal of psychological research on it. Then I went out onto the street and asked people; dozens and dozens of ordinary people, old, young, rich, poor... Result: People really care about privacy. You can read all about it in the podcast and blog I am not allowed to mention…

Why are you not allowed to post the podcast here? HN rules or rules for the podcast? Or something else?

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

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Location History is privacy friendly now. It was just recently changed a month or two ago and it no longer works in the way the article describes. The history data is now stored on your phone. Cloud backups are optional and default off and always end-to-end encrypted if enabled, so your location history database is not ever accessible to any Google server. Google made this change in response to issues like the…

>not ever accessible to any google server How can they use it for ad targeting then?

They can't, obviously. Is this some kind of trick question?

Your location can be used for ad targeting in other contexts. For example if you granted location permission to google.com in your browser, Google gets your location at the time you do a query and uses it both to provide relevant results and to target ads. And if you have search history on, I assume that location snapshot would be saved along with the query in search history, which Google can see. But the comprehensive and much more detailed "Location History" that is collected constantly in the background (when enabled) can't be seen by Google anymore.

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

#95

One consolation: it works both ways with this kind of data. For example, it can corroborate your story.

Well now if it corroborates your story, you can voluntarily share it; if it doesn’t, you can tell law enforcement to get a warrant or pound sand

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

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1/3 of active google users is a lot of people to opt into giving away their privacy. Either they actually don't understand what they did, understand but were forced in some way or understand and truly believe the value of the service was worth the privacy invasion. It is pure speculation on my part but my guess is that the first two reasons dwarf the third. The decision in question though would, in my view, only have…

Do you carry a smartphone?

Yes, it's a Librem 5 with GNU/Linux and hardware kill switches which cut all networks when I need 100% privacy.

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

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone can choose to avoid any one of these parts of the modern world. Well my apartment building is about to replace the doorbells with a cell phone app (or phone calls as an alternative). No cell phone -> no door bell. I'm just a renter; I get no say in the matter.

Can people not still rap their knuckles upon your chamber door?

I assume they would need to rap on the main entrance door, which could be five floors below this individuals apartment - not just their apartment door.

(I.e. this is an entry phone that permits you to remotely unlock the street level door which is being replaced with a mobile app / phone call)

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

#98
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have an huge reputational risk I don't understand this argument. The most hated corporations in the US are all insanely rich and are at zero risk of going out of business even though most people hate them. After a certain point, corporations have basically nothing to fear from bad press. Google specifically has been found guilty of violating the law and people's privacy on numerous occasions already, including…

>whistleblowers are extremely rare. The few protections they have are being reduced all the time, and the risk is huge. Very few people will give up their career and risk becoming unhirable. Except you don't need to whistleblow by testifying in front of congress or whatever. You can anonymously post on HN (or similar tech-oriented forums) with proof and it would be enough to get the ball rolling. Android and google p…

"You can anonymously post on HN" - New account? flagged / green / unvouched and HN will still be able to connect the account unless . And you know they all connected with each other

Could do speech analysis on the text and compare against company slack / email.

only a few people have the access to the leaked info and trivial to work out

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

#99
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have an huge reputational risk I don't understand this argument. The most hated corporations in the US are all insanely rich and are at zero risk of going out of business even though most people hate them. After a certain point, corporations have basically nothing to fear from bad press. Google specifically has been found guilty of violating the law and people's privacy on numerous occasions already, including…

>whistleblowers are extremely rare. The few protections they have are being reduced all the time, and the risk is huge. Very few people will give up their career and risk becoming unhirable. Except you don't need to whistleblow by testifying in front of congress or whatever. You can anonymously post on HN (or similar tech-oriented forums) with proof and it would be enough to get the ball rolling. Android and google p…

> Except you don't need to whistleblow by testifying in front of congress or whatever. You can anonymously post on HN (or similar tech-oriented forums) with proof and it would be enough to get the ball rolling.

I'd bet that very few people would have the kind of access to see what violations of people's privacy are taking place and that proof someone posted to social media (besides a massive leak of innocent people's personal data) may not be verifiable by anyone other than google employees or regulators/government who could get into Google's internal systems.

I suppose that they could if there was a lie_to_public_about_data_collection() function in Android's source code or a massive store of location data that shouldn't exist just sitting unencrypted on our devices and being transmitted to google unencrypted, but other situations would be much less clear.

For example, when you open Google maps, you'd fully expect that your location would be sent to google. You'd also expect that google wouldn't keep that information tied to your account if you'd opted out of that tracking in your account settings. If google were keeping a copy of that location data on an internal server somewhere, associated with your dossier, but not made visible to users (or even most google employees) what proof would you expect to see posted to HN that we could verify for ourselves? Screenshots of the database/internal tool/documentation might be good, but screenshots can be faked and since we don't have access to the database, or the server deep inside google that hosts it, or their internal documentation we'd be unable to say for sure if it the screenshots were real.

Companies are using all kinds of tricks these days to catch whistleblowers like logging anyone who accesses sensitive information and adding hidden watermarks to documents and images. Just going to social media or the press could be very risky.

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

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual accuracy is worse than before but it’s a welcome change. They do still offer a way to keep an encrypted backup of the database on Google servers (so you don’t lose it if you lose your phone) but its disabled by default and it doesn’t even have a modal popup making it easy to enable backups, you have to specifically click the UI button to see the modal with the info sheet and a button to enable backing it u…

> a welcome change Can someone explain why it's good that your official law infrastructure has no access to Google when in need? Is this some kind of bizzaro-extermist-libertarianism "government is evil" from America again?

Because law enforcement must be costly and non-automated to avoid the unbalanced power distribution between an individual and the gov, which only serves the individual and not rules them.

A cost to catch a criminal should be a manual and expensive work from an agent and thus provide no ability to mass abuse human rights on scale. Only on actual criminals when needed.

Post reply on HN