4 ms·
This leaves out an important part: in sensitive areas like a SCIF. All they’re really saying is that modern smart watches can have similar capability to phones—
by lvh 8y ago
This leaves out an important part: in sensitive areas like a SCIF. All they’re really saying is that modern smart watches can have similar capability to phones—we don’t allow those, so we shouldn’t allow the new watches either. Pretty straightforward.
- dx87 8y agoThat's not what this article is about at all. Anything that has any sort of transmission or recording capabilities has been banned inside of secure facilities for as long I can remember, fitness devices aren't something that would need to be covered by a new rule. They don't want you wearing devices that share GPS coordinates because it makes it simple to get accurate locations of buildings and troop schedules. Instead of blindly firing mortars into a base, just look for where the GPS signals cluster at night and you probably know where everyone is sleeping. See a signal that goes from the troop quarters to the base perimeter, then goes back a few hours later? Probably someone on guard duty, now you can start figuring out when the shift rotations happen.
- ramses0 8y agoMore specifically, it's the recording and exfiltration of even step/step-count data that is dangerous. I have a lot of walking 1-1's on Mondays, which means my step count is easily double that of Thursdays (WFH days). - "5 minutes, 100 steps, 55 minutes zero steps" (meeting) - "5 minutes, 100 steps, 55 minutes zero steps" (meeting) - "8 minutes, 200 steps, 52 minutes zero steps" (bathroom) - "45 minutes, 999 steps, 15 minutes zero steps" (lunch) - "5 minutes, 100 steps, 55 minutes zero steps" (meeting) By correlation stand/sit times you start to edge pretty close to a rough determination of who is in meetings together, or walking from room A to room B at the same time.