6 ms·

The idea that you'd have any location privacy while carrying around a cell phone is absurd. Both iPhone and Android devices record location history, and your ne

The idea that you'd have any location privacy while carrying around a cell phone is absurd. Both iPhone and Android devices record location history, and your network provider always has a rough guess of where you are. It may be annoying that Google is very persistent about trying to build its maps dataset, but the suggestion that it's not happening on other devices is crazy.

kuschku 9y ago
My mobile carrier is a local server hoster that also happens to operate a fiber and DSL network in the city, and a small 3G network. They don’t track – I’ve talked with them, personally. And in the future, with the Librem phones, we’ll also be able to ensure there is no tracking on the device side.
- jrochkind1 9y ago
  Hmm, they don't intentionally track or keep tracking data, but for cell phones to work the network _has_ to know what tower you are next to (or really what 'cell' you are in, why it's called a 'cellular phone'), to deliver a phone call or txt to you. What happens if they get a law enforcement request with warrant/subpoena? I bet the data is there to be delivered. If they aren't _very_ intentional about scrubbing it, it's maybe there in some historical logs too.
  - geofft 9y ago
    I see a huge difference between "will violate my privacy if served with a valid subpoena" and "will violate my privacy to make money on a daily basis". (And, for what it's worth, Apple has fought against a valid subpoena for iPhone data that they did technically have the capability of answering.)
    - jrochkind1 9y ago
      true enough! Just good to know what data is where and accessible by whom. I am pleased that the publicity (mainly from Snowden release) has led some businesses to fight subpoenas and/or warrants in court. I definitely don't count on them to keep doing it, pretty easy for them to silently comply (even _without_ a warrant/subpoena) without publicity, as most everyone has generally done until recently (and I suspect still does often). Also, if you fight in court and lose in court, pretty sure any company will of course hand over the data at that point.
      - geofft 9y ago
        I mean, I'm also less worried about attacks by the government than attacks by private corporations. The government literally has a monopoly on violence. If they want me to have a bad day, I will have a bad day and there's nothing I can do about it. But there are lots of other threats worth protecting myself against.
        jrochkind1 9y ago
        a subpoena can of course from a private entity as part of a lawsuit.
  - exhilaration 9y ago
    They do indeed keep tracking data, see my comment above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16181406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16181406
  - kuschku 9y ago
    > What happens if they get a law enforcement request with warrant/subpoena? I bet the data is there to be delivered. If they aren't _very_ intentional about scrubbing it, it's maybe there in some historical logs too. Under current German and EU law, they can only keep logs as long as technically necessary. If a warrant, specific to me, personally, exists, they can collect future connection info. And I’m okay with that – requiring a warrant specifically to be written for me, specifically signed by a judge, and in a way that they can’t be rubberstamped is okay, and about the level of surveillance that is a reasonable tradeoff.
    - jrochkind1 9y ago
      Have you ever actually audited exactly what logs your enterprise is keeping? Most people haven't. The law notwithstanding, minimizing personally identifiable information in logs actually requires intentional and positive action (meaning additional hours/expense). If you just let all your systems produce what logs they do by default, get backed up if they happen to get backed up, etc. -- you will have quite a bit more logging bits sitting around than you probably realized or intended or needed. Is it more than is "technically necessary"? I am not sure what that phrase means legally or practically. But I doubt that law has actually resulted in companies spending significant additional staff time minimizing logs they didn't really mean to be keeping int the first place. It is not a trivial operation.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        > But I doubt that law has actually resulted in companies spending significant additional staff time minimizing logs they didn't really mean to be keeping int the first place. It is not a trivial operation. This is Germany – the place where the requirement for websites to contain a working contact address in the real world is enforced not through law, but through people just suing every website owner whose site doesn’t have an imprint. The ISP is only keeping as much as absolutely necessary, because every bit more would be an unnecessary legal liability. Personal data is a liability, not an asset. Of course, there’s also companies with different viewpoints, but this one doesn’t keep any more than absolutely necessary.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Cyberdog 9y ago
But it's not, though, at least not to this extent. I've never had my iPhone survey me about the world around me. I suppose it's theoretically possible that an app like Yelp could do that, but iOS pops up a "Do you want to allow this app to track your location when you're not using it?" notification whenever an app wants to do so, and of course that's always an instant push of the "hell naw" button for me.
Angostura 9y ago
On iOS Settings > Privacy > Location Services > System Services Then turn off everything in the Product Improvement section, turn off Significant Locations and anything else in there you don't want. Done
- izacus 9y ago
  Same thing on Android is under Settings -> Google -> Location -> Location History
- Sephr 9y ago
  This doesn't prevent your cell carrier from tracking you.
  - jandrese 9y ago
    Sure you're still tracked, but at least Verizon isn't creepily reminding you of it. The blog author freaked out because Google is trying to crowdsource info about a place from people who are actually visiting it, which they know because their phone has location tracking. I think the author might want to step back and think about everything his phone can do before getting worked up over this one minor aspect.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - khedoros1 9y ago
    Your cell carrier can't deliver your calls if they don't track you somehow.
geofft 9y ago
There's a huge and meaningful distinction about the technical ability to violate your privacy, and actually doing so, and trust (slash non-creepiness) is largely about not doing so when you could. For instance, the fact that my roommate can open my bedroom door at any time does not mean that I have no privacy when making phone calls in my room; it means that I have privacy because I trust my roommate not to do so, except perhaps in an emergency. A roommate who randomly opens my door and comments on my conversations would be a creepy roommate. iPhone gives you lots of controls around location history, and certainly there is nothing in the iPhone ecosystem where they want you to contribute reviews or human analysis to help them with gathering data. I trust that these controls work. My cell phone provider knows where I am to route calls, but I trust that they aren't also keeping the data for fun / marketing / etc. The suggestion that it couldn't happen on other devices is certainly at odds with technical capabilities; the suggestion that it isn't happening is a different one entirely, and is not crazy.
- Anderkent 9y ago
  Why do you think whether your phone asks you if you want to send a restaurant review is in any way related to whether your phone provider is using your location data maliciously? In fact if there's any relation wouldn't it be the reverse? If you're using the location data unethically, you wouldn't want to draw attention to the fact that it's being gathered.
  - geofft 9y ago
    I don't think that - the behavior I object to is not solely behavior that the provider thinks is malicious / unethical. The roommate in my example who barges in on my phone calls could believe they were genuinely contributing to whatever conversation I was having on the phone and helping me out, but they would still be creepy. So I don't see this as about whether the provider has "good" or "bad" intentions; I see this as about whether the provider asks me for permission/consent before using my data. It's certainly theoretically possible that a provider is good at talking the talk and also being actively malicious, by asking for permission and then ignoring it or something, but that's not the problem I have or the article's author has with Google.
dredmorbius 9y ago
Dear Googles, stop asking https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 Privacy is the capacity to define, have respected and defend, boundaries on personal intrusions. Google and other surveillance capitalism companies expressly fail to allow such limits to be stated, and silently change settings, or subvert them. Enough already.
nullymcnull 9y ago
Google just can't seem to win with some people. Notifications like this have an obvious benefit, in that they make the degree of tracking that is happening very clear even to the non-technical end user (and if they aren't comfortable with the tradeoffs involved, they can disable it). But apparently simple acknowledgement of what the phone (any smartphone) already knows is "creepy", and it's more comforting to bury your head in the sand and pretend it isn't going on ("I'm going back to an iPhone"). Out of sight, out of mind, I guess. This whole post just gets sillier as it goes. It's dire and creepy and "robotic" for Google to acknowledge that your phone, the internet, and their business are machine-driven, and to be open + straightforward about the fact that said machines can make good use of your human judgement + opinion, for the benefit of other humans? They need to "soften this blow"? Really?
cm2187 9y ago
The network provider records which antenna you trigger but has no need of recording your precise GPS location. Google has absolutely no good reason to record your GPS location without your consent other than for nosy purposes.
- exhilaration 9y ago
  My understanding is that thanks to E911 your precise location is tracked, and that's the information that mobile phone network operators provide to law enforcement through their location portals: ... web portal that Sprint provides law enforcement to conduct automated “pings” to track users. Through the website, authorized agents can type in a mobile phone number and obtain global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of the phone. From: https://www.wired.com/2009/12/gps-data/ https://www.wired.com/2009/12/gps-data/
  - dingaling 9y ago
    I think that's just a misuse of GPS as a substitute term for 'high-precision' location, probably from cell tower data. There is a common misconception that GPS is some sort of surveillance system that can return the position of a receiver.
  - khedoros1 9y ago
    Apparently, E911 is just the technology that delivers a location to the emergency call center. Collecting data about the actual location is just a range specification: https://www.fcc.gov/general/enhanced-9-1-1-wireless-services https://www.fcc.gov/general/enhanced-9-1-1-wireless-services They allow network-based location (like signal triangulation), where the location needs to be withing 100 meters for 67 percent of calls and 300 meters for 95 percent of the calls, and handset-based navigation (like GPS) where it has to be within 50 meters for 67% of calls, and within 150 meters for 90% of calls. Within those guidelines, I think that the phone provider can propose methods to use and have them approved by the FCC. But I guess whether your "precise" location gets tracked depends on the level of precision you're thinking of.

kuschku 9y ago

My mobile carrier is a local server hoster that also happens to operate a fiber and DSL network in the city, and a small 3G network. They don’t track – I’ve talked with them, personally. And in the future, with the Librem phones, we’ll also be able to ensure there is no tracking on the device side.

jrochkind1 9y ago
Hmm, they don't intentionally track or keep tracking data, but for cell phones to work the network _has_ to know what tower you are next to (or really what 'cell' you are in, why it's called a 'cellular phone'), to deliver a phone call or txt to you. What happens if they get a law enforcement request with warrant/subpoena? I bet the data is there to be delivered. If they aren't _very_ intentional about scrubbing it, it's maybe there in some historical logs too.
- geofft 9y ago
  I see a huge difference between "will violate my privacy if served with a valid subpoena" and "will violate my privacy to make money on a daily basis". (And, for what it's worth, Apple has fought against a valid subpoena for iPhone data that they did technically have the capability of answering.)
  - jrochkind1 9y ago
    true enough! Just good to know what data is where and accessible by whom. I am pleased that the publicity (mainly from Snowden release) has led some businesses to fight subpoenas and/or warrants in court. I definitely don't count on them to keep doing it, pretty easy for them to silently comply (even _without_ a warrant/subpoena) without publicity, as most everyone has generally done until recently (and I suspect still does often). Also, if you fight in court and lose in court, pretty sure any company will of course hand over the data at that point.
    - geofft 9y ago
      I mean, I'm also less worried about attacks by the government than attacks by private corporations. The government literally has a monopoly on violence. If they want me to have a bad day, I will have a bad day and there's nothing I can do about it. But there are lots of other threats worth protecting myself against.
      - jrochkind1 9y ago
        a subpoena can of course from a private entity as part of a lawsuit.
- exhilaration 9y ago
  They do indeed keep tracking data, see my comment above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16181406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16181406
- kuschku 9y ago
  > What happens if they get a law enforcement request with warrant/subpoena? I bet the data is there to be delivered. If they aren't _very_ intentional about scrubbing it, it's maybe there in some historical logs too. Under current German and EU law, they can only keep logs as long as technically necessary. If a warrant, specific to me, personally, exists, they can collect future connection info. And I’m okay with that – requiring a warrant specifically to be written for me, specifically signed by a judge, and in a way that they can’t be rubberstamped is okay, and about the level of surveillance that is a reasonable tradeoff.
  - jrochkind1 9y ago
    Have you ever actually audited exactly what logs your enterprise is keeping? Most people haven't. The law notwithstanding, minimizing personally identifiable information in logs actually requires intentional and positive action (meaning additional hours/expense). If you just let all your systems produce what logs they do by default, get backed up if they happen to get backed up, etc. -- you will have quite a bit more logging bits sitting around than you probably realized or intended or needed. Is it more than is "technically necessary"? I am not sure what that phrase means legally or practically. But I doubt that law has actually resulted in companies spending significant additional staff time minimizing logs they didn't really mean to be keeping int the first place. It is not a trivial operation.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      > But I doubt that law has actually resulted in companies spending significant additional staff time minimizing logs they didn't really mean to be keeping int the first place. It is not a trivial operation. This is Germany – the place where the requirement for websites to contain a working contact address in the real world is enforced not through law, but through people just suing every website owner whose site doesn’t have an imprint. The ISP is only keeping as much as absolutely necessary, because every bit more would be an unnecessary legal liability. Personal data is a liability, not an asset. Of course, there’s also companies with different viewpoints, but this one doesn’t keep any more than absolutely necessary.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Cyberdog 9y ago

But it's not, though, at least not to this extent. I've never had my iPhone survey me about the world around me. I suppose it's theoretically possible that an app like Yelp could do that, but iOS pops up a "Do you want to allow this app to track your location when you're not using it?" notification whenever an app wants to do so, and of course that's always an instant push of the "hell naw" button for me.

Angostura 9y ago

On iOS Settings > Privacy > Location Services > System Services Then turn off everything in the Product Improvement section, turn off Significant Locations and anything else in there you don't want. Done

izacus 9y ago
Same thing on Android is under Settings -> Google -> Location -> Location History
Sephr 9y ago
This doesn't prevent your cell carrier from tracking you.
- jandrese 9y ago
  Sure you're still tracked, but at least Verizon isn't creepily reminding you of it. The blog author freaked out because Google is trying to crowdsource info about a place from people who are actually visiting it, which they know because their phone has location tracking. I think the author might want to step back and think about everything his phone can do before getting worked up over this one minor aspect.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- khedoros1 9y ago
  Your cell carrier can't deliver your calls if they don't track you somehow.

geofft 9y ago

There's a huge and meaningful distinction about the technical ability to violate your privacy, and actually doing so, and trust (slash non-creepiness) is largely about not doing so when you could. For instance, the fact that my roommate can open my bedroom door at any time does not mean that I have no privacy when making phone calls in my room; it means that I have privacy because I trust my roommate not to do so, except perhaps in an emergency. A roommate who randomly opens my door and comments on my conversations would be a creepy roommate. iPhone gives you lots of controls around location history, and certainly there is nothing in the iPhone ecosystem where they want you to contribute reviews or human analysis to help them with gathering data. I trust that these controls work. My cell phone provider knows where I am to route calls, but I trust that they aren't also keeping the data for fun / marketing / etc. The suggestion that it couldn't happen on other devices is certainly at odds with technical capabilities; the suggestion that it isn't happening is a different one entirely, and is not crazy.

Anderkent 9y ago
Why do you think whether your phone asks you if you want to send a restaurant review is in any way related to whether your phone provider is using your location data maliciously? In fact if there's any relation wouldn't it be the reverse? If you're using the location data unethically, you wouldn't want to draw attention to the fact that it's being gathered.
- geofft 9y ago
  I don't think that - the behavior I object to is not solely behavior that the provider thinks is malicious / unethical. The roommate in my example who barges in on my phone calls could believe they were genuinely contributing to whatever conversation I was having on the phone and helping me out, but they would still be creepy. So I don't see this as about whether the provider has "good" or "bad" intentions; I see this as about whether the provider asks me for permission/consent before using my data. It's certainly theoretically possible that a provider is good at talking the talk and also being actively malicious, by asking for permission and then ignoring it or something, but that's not the problem I have or the article's author has with Google.

dredmorbius 9y ago

Dear Googles, stop asking https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 Privacy is the capacity to define, have respected and defend, boundaries on personal intrusions. Google and other surveillance capitalism companies expressly fail to allow such limits to be stated, and silently change settings, or subvert them. Enough already.

nullymcnull 9y ago

Google just can't seem to win with some people. Notifications like this have an obvious benefit, in that they make the degree of tracking that is happening very clear even to the non-technical end user (and if they aren't comfortable with the tradeoffs involved, they can disable it). But apparently simple acknowledgement of what the phone (any smartphone) already knows is "creepy", and it's more comforting to bury your head in the sand and pretend it isn't going on ("I'm going back to an iPhone"). Out of sight, out of mind, I guess. This whole post just gets sillier as it goes. It's dire and creepy and "robotic" for Google to acknowledge that your phone, the internet, and their business are machine-driven, and to be open + straightforward about the fact that said machines can make good use of your human judgement + opinion, for the benefit of other humans? They need to "soften this blow"? Really?

cm2187 9y ago

The network provider records which antenna you trigger but has no need of recording your precise GPS location. Google has absolutely no good reason to record your GPS location without your consent other than for nosy purposes.

exhilaration 9y ago
My understanding is that thanks to E911 your precise location is tracked, and that's the information that mobile phone network operators provide to law enforcement through their location portals: ... web portal that Sprint provides law enforcement to conduct automated “pings” to track users. Through the website, authorized agents can type in a mobile phone number and obtain global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of the phone. From: https://www.wired.com/2009/12/gps-data/ https://www.wired.com/2009/12/gps-data/
- dingaling 9y ago
  I think that's just a misuse of GPS as a substitute term for 'high-precision' location, probably from cell tower data. There is a common misconception that GPS is some sort of surveillance system that can return the position of a receiver.
- khedoros1 9y ago
  Apparently, E911 is just the technology that delivers a location to the emergency call center. Collecting data about the actual location is just a range specification: https://www.fcc.gov/general/enhanced-9-1-1-wireless-services https://www.fcc.gov/general/enhanced-9-1-1-wireless-services They allow network-based location (like signal triangulation), where the location needs to be withing 100 meters for 67 percent of calls and 300 meters for 95 percent of the calls, and handset-based navigation (like GPS) where it has to be within 50 meters for 67% of calls, and within 150 meters for 90% of calls. Within those guidelines, I think that the phone provider can propose methods to use and have them approved by the FCC. But I guess whether your "precise" location gets tracked depends on the level of precision you're thinking of.