12 ms·
This raises another imprtant question: Is it okay for a private company to have detailed positioning data from inside of your office or home? Who would really
by pawadu 10y ago
This raises another imprtant question:
Is it okay for a private company to have detailed positioning data from inside of your office or home?
Who would really need that sort of information?
I understand how this can be useful at the mall but I think I can find my way around my own house thank you.
- deelowe 10y agoI thought you can disable it.
- mikestew 10y agoIs it okay for a private company to have detailed positioning data from inside of your office or home? I don't know the answer to that question, but I have a guess at the answer to another question: "is it okay for a private company to create a geodatabase of SSID strings that were freely and willingly broadcast via radio?" I think the answer is "yes". Ten, fifteen years ago, if there were an HN story about how I, owner of a small business you've never heard of, created a database of SSIDs that are broadcast and tagged them with lat/longs, I'd bet money it would make the top of the front page. Bonus points if I included an API and threw the thing up on github. Fine, it's evil, append "_nomap" to your SSID string. That's fine for stopping Google, but it won't stop "owner of small business you've never heard of". Don't broad SSIDs, but then (IIRC) one can still obtain the MAC address. But in the end, if a radio broadcasts something then one has little recourse when receivers use that broadcast in ways you didn't intend. The analogy crumbles under a little scrutiny, but it's similar to FM broadcasters complain about geodatabases of FM towers because the intent of the broadcaster was to allow you to listen to drive-time hyenas, not use it for location services.
- nitrogen 10y agoI seriously doubt most people even know whst "broadcast" means, or that "their" wifi is not limited to their own four walls and personal use.
- bhhaskin 10y agoNot knowing how it works doesn't change the fact that broadcasting the SSID is a key part of how wifi works. The only real solution is not to use wifi if you don't want it to be mapped.
- mikestew 10y ago"Ignorance is no excuse"? I mean, I don't know what the solution is if that's an allowable excuse. Google has to run PSA's on how WiFi works before they're allowed to scoop up SSIDs? Additionally, I don't buy that to begin with, at least not as it concerns the majority. Where do folks think those other SSIDs (even if they don't call them that) in their list of networks come from?
- TeMPOraL 10y agoCome on. There have to be some minimum standards of knowledge required for the citizens of a technological society, and I'd argue that "how radio works" is one of those things one should be expected to know.
- paavokoya 10y agominimum standards of knowledge required for the citizens Do you know how the electricity in your wall works? What about the plumbing under your house? Would you be able to fix those things on your own?
- DominikR 10y agoHis argument was that you can reasonably expect people to know how to handle such technologies safely, not that he expects people to know how to build a WiFi Router from electronic parts themselves. Using your analogy it would be sufficient for a person to know how to handle electricity coming from your wall or the plumbing under your house safely. And generally people do know how to do that. Everyone who is regularly using WiFi networks knows that he/she can see the names of other WiFi networks in their vicinity. Therefore people using WiFi generally do know that this information is publicly broadcasted and available to be collected by anyone interested in doing so. No one believes that he is the only person being able to somehow magically see the name of his neighbours WiFi.
- tdkl 10y ago> Fine, it's evil, append "_nomap" to your SSID string. That's fine for stopping Google, This should be opt-in by default in sane universe, not opt-out.
- dragonwriter 10y agoI'd agree, if you mean broadcasting an SSID should be opt-in by default, but not if you mean having a publicly broadcast SSID be mapped should be opt-in by default separately from broadcasting the SSID. OTOH, to the extent this is not true, its ISPs and router manufacturers who are at fault.
- packetslave 10y agoif broadcasting SSID was not on by default, mom and dad would be screaming at tech support that wifi isn't "working" on their phone because the network isn't in the list of discovered networks.
- tdkl 10y agoI've meant sharing the location of the SSID with $company should be opt-in. Who the fuck do they think they are?
- dragonwriter 10y ago> I've meant sharing the location of the SSID with $company should be opt-in. Broadcasting is, inherently, sharing location with everyone with a receiver. > Who the fuck do they think they are? People with receivers (see above.)
- tdkl 10y agoOk, but one thing is broadcasting something that has a limited reach then documenting and storing in various databases around the planet.
- 10y ago
- tlow 10y agoWhen you use their service your forfeit your privacy.
- brightsize 10y agoYou don't even need to use their services, interested crowdsourcers will map your router and help build a SSID:location database just for fun. https://www.wigle.net/ https://www.wigle.net/
- kuschku 10y agoSo, then it’d also be legal if I stand near all schools, and photograph every child with a telezoom lens, follow each of them home, and then publish a website with photos of every child and where they live? If they don’t want to be seen, they can just stop broadcasting their face and wear a burqa, right? There is a huge difference between "publicly available in every case seperately" and "publicly indexable". EDIT: Instead of downvoting, please leave a comment instead – do you disagree because you believe there’s a fundamental difference between gigahertz and terahertz light waves? Or is there another reason you disagree?
- DominikR 10y agoIt is different because this behaviour fits a well know pattern of a certain type of criminal. The child molester. There is no such established pattern where we can reasonably assume that a company collecting SSIDs will usually do this to act in a criminal way. By the way I didn't down vote you, but I think this is the "common sense" reason why people reject your position.
- kuschku 10y agoWell, but it applies to every other such case, too. You can't publicly index newspaper articles that are already decades old and irrelevant, you can't publicly index photos of buildings, you can't publicly index the names of people even. Every of these things requires written approval of everyone listed, be it StreetView, the application of the Right to be Forgotten, or collecting WiFi SSIDs. So the question is: why does everything require approval, except for SSIDs?
- grkvlt 10y agoDoes it? I didn't give written approval for the Google StreetView car to photography the front of my house. If I was to create a database of photographs of buildings, taken from a public location and indexed by street address, I don't believe I have to get permission, and the product could be released publicly, or even sold to estate agents or similar. I used to have to give the phone company written (or st least explicit) notice to opt out of their public index of numbers and names. So, it seems most things operate the same way as SSIDs, public information requires an opt-out to be available, not an opt-in.
- grkvlt 10y agoInteresting point about `_nomap` which I wasn't aware of until now. See this page, under 'How do I opt out?' for details: https://support.google.com/nexus/answer/1725632?hl=en&visit_id=1-636102550082717733-271635703&rd=1 https://support.google.com/nexus/answer/1725632?hl=en&visit_...
- mentat 10y agoThis existed 15 years ago, called WiGLE.
- xiaoma 10y ago~
- qntty 10y agoGP meant private-sector company