10 ms·

The carriers have the same data for dumbphones as well as smartphones, and I bet Verizon and AT&T are much more cooperative than Google and Apple with blanket r

The carriers have the same data for dumbphones as well as smartphones, and I bet Verizon and AT&T are much more cooperative than Google and Apple with blanket requests. If you care about that stuff, you should abandon carrying a phone--switching away from a smartphone is probably useless if not counterproductive.

JohnFen 7y ago
> The carriers have the same data for dumbphones as well as smartphones This is true. But I'm not a privacy absolutist. I'm willing to sacrifice privacy for some things, and having a phone is one of those things. But that I'm willing to put up with that from one company in no way means that I'm willing to put up with that from other companies. > switching away from a smartphone is probably useless if not counterproductive. I don't see how -- can you explain? Reducing data leakage seems useful even if I'm not completely eliminating it, and I don't see how it's actively counterproductive at all.
- mehrdada 7y ago
  > I don't see how -- can you explain? There is a large amount of $$$ that goes into security of iOS and iPhone (sometimes orthogonal to privacy, sometimes not) that does not go into a dumbphone. The iPhone is also much more scrutinized and researched into than a random dumbphone, so it is plausible that you get much more exposure to exploits, etc., using a dumbphone that does not get updates etc.
  - chipperyman573 7y ago
    On the other hand, China is known to have and use ios zero days (souce: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/09/massive_iphone_.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/09/massive_iphon...). It's likely other countries have these as well. It seems unlikely they put the same efforts into finding a zero day for a nokia. There might be a super easy to find zero-day though, like you're saying.
    - xenospn 7y ago
      I would argue that it’s much more likely they’d try to get a person of interest to use a compromised “burner” phone, actually.
    - BoorishBears 7y ago
      If it's anything like the old days, they don't need to horde a 0 day. There were always obscure pieces of software that would pull your forgotten pin right off the device with the right secret code, in which case you have full access to the device. I'd also expect them to be vulnerable to much simpler attacks like just reading flash chips directly
    - sangnoir 7y ago
      > On the other hand, China is known to have and use ios zero days What's your threat-model? If your adversary is a nation-state on par with China, you're probably toast unless you have a well-resourced entity supporting you (think large corporate or another nation-state)
    - scarface74 7y ago
      I’m much less worry about China having my information than the local justice system.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    But the majority of that security is required due to the vulnerabilities that come with the smart part of smartphones. A dumb phone has a much smaller attack surface. If I use the phone solely for texting and the occasional tethering and phone call, my exposure is automatically seriously reduced. The dumb phone has no access to the pocket computer, after all.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Unlikely. Dumbphones aren't interesting targets and configurations are vastly more heterogeneous. Finding exploits can be a huge amount of work. edit: In a laboratory environment, it is probably easier to break into a dumbphone vs breaking into an iPhone, yes.
- mindslight 7y ago
  A "smart" phone lets you use software with better protocols than the government approved (designed) cell network. For example, turn off your cell radio but still using a messaging app (eg Matrix/XMPP) over open wifi (rotating macaddrs of course), instead of having to connect to cell towers to receive text messages. I can't tell you which results in better opsec today for say carrying out government-disapproved commerce. But I can tell you that the privacy benefits of having a bona fide computer that you control in your pocket will continue to grow, while the cell network is stuck being forever subservient to government/commercial surveillance.
- roywiggins 7y ago
  I can't run Signal on a dumbphone, and protecting my data seems more important than my metadata.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    I wouldn't be using the dumbphone for that sort of thing. I'd be using the pocket computer.
    - roywiggins 7y ago
      That's reasonable. A bit cumbersome, but not too bad. It's a shame the Windows client for Signal is an Electron app, which may or may not run well on a small machine.
      - boring_twenties 7y ago
        Imagine being concerned about privacy to the point of building your own pocket computer to carry instead of a smartphone, and then installing Windows on it. I can't even stop laughing at this
giancarlostoro 7y ago
Or own a "burner" type of phone with minimal data about yourself. Alternatively what RMS does is he shuts off his phone and only turns it on when he needs to use it.
- bilbo0s 7y ago
  Burner phones have a lot more info about you than people think. Or at least I know that in one court case there was a nice big 8x10 of the defendant purchasing a burner phone. Apparently a lot of Point of Sale systems, especially where they sell burner phones, are wired to take a nice portrait of you when you purchase. I didn't know that at the time, and apparently, neither did the defendant. That, combined with the location of his phone matching the location of his license plate around town did him in. So if you try the burner phone thing, someone else has to buy it, and you should never take it with you to places where there are likely to be security cameras. And you also might want to refrain from driving with it in your vehicle.
  - jmpman 7y ago
    Not sure if I want to live my life like I’m planning a bank robbery at any minute. Seems more effective to petition your representative to restrict use of this data.
    - ColanR 7y ago
      Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much difference between that and just trying to enjoy a modicum of privacy.
    - a1369209993 7y ago
      Well the assumption when proposing a plan is that we want the plan to actually accomplish something. If we don't care about effectiveness, then "ignore the problem and hope it goes away" is clearly the best option.
    - shoes_for_thee 7y ago
      the fucked up part is that the government is apparently living their life as if you're planning a bank robbery any minute.
keiferski 7y ago
An old iPod touch/tablet with WiFi might be a sufficient replacement.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  I'm not a fan of the Apple ecosystem, so that doesn't work for me specifically. But I am going to carry a pocket computer that doesn't have cellphone capabilities to replace what I use a smartphone for. And it will be running ordinary Linux, not Android.
  - Diederich 7y ago
    Cool; can you share which one you're thinking about using? Thanks.
    - JohnFen 7y ago
      I'm building my own.
      - boring_twenties 7y ago
        Don't leave us hanging like that, bro. Are you going to start with a generic ARM dev board, or what?
        JohnFen 7y ago
        The prototype I have breadboarded up uses an ARM dev board (I'm keeping close to the chip that R-Pis use, so I can leverage that existing code), but the end product will be a PCB of my own design. Once I've completed the project, it's very likely that I'll write it up on one of my websites. I'll submit the link to HN at that time so everyone can see what I've done. The short and sweet, it's an ARM-based micro, with WiFi, Bluetooth, a couple of USB ports and an HDMI output (to use with a HUD that I have). It will have an old-school color 4-inch LCD with resistive touch for its screen (not ideal, but the best I can do right now. I'll work on upgrading that to an OLED w/capactive touch in version 2). It will also have 8 physical buttons, because I like physical buttons. It will be in a 3D printed case. The total size will be roughly the same as an average thin smartphone, but will be a mm or two thicker. It will link up with my watch, which will be the primary way I interact with it on a daily basis. My goal is that 90% of the time I won't need to actually handle the device itself.
everdrive 7y ago
If you mean GSM information it's not quite the same. You can also easily power most non-smartphones off, meaning they won't communicate with the tower.
- mehrdada 7y ago
  You can theoretically turn off your iPhone easily as well. Unless your dumbphone has a removable battery it would be just as difficult to trust it's actually off than a modern phone. But sure, removable battery would be an advantage on that dimension, I agree.
  - grmn 7y ago
    It's a hassle but you can carry the turned-off phone in a small metal box. Feels bad but should work.
    - reaperducer 7y ago
      There was a story on HN a while ago about municipal workers putting their phones in potato chip bags so they couldn't be tracked. Apparently it worked.
StanislavPetrov 7y ago
The carriers have your location data on a dumbphone - only the carriers (certainly not Google) - and that's all the data they have. In addition, I can take the battery out of my dumb phone any time and all their ability to track my location goes away. My dumb phone doesn't have apps and doesn't have wi-fi, which means my data isn't being harvested by every company with an app and every passing wi-fi hotspot. Certainly you'd do better not to carry a phone at all but its just wrong to claim that "the same data" is available (and being broadcast) by your dumb phone.
Spooky23 7y ago
Seriously. Carriers have been selling tower data since the late 90s.
randyrand 7y ago
Not nearly as high accurate as GPS
- scarface74 7y ago
  Dumb phones have had reliable and accurate GPS since at least 2004-2005.
est31 7y ago
They do have location data but their resolution is much more coarse than Google's, especially in areas with a low cell tower density (rural areas)
- pinkfoot 7y ago
  Rural location accuracy on GSM and UMTS networks is < 500m for 80% of attempts. Source: it was one of my less-unsuccessful projects :)
mkhpalm 7y ago
> and I bet Verizon and AT&T are much more cooperative than Google and Apple with blanket requests. I'm always confused by statements like this. What makes you think Google and Apple are any different in willingness than Verizon and AT&T? Or what makes anybody think any of them even have a choice turning over data on their users? What do people think other people do when some law enforcement agencies show up on their doorsteps with warrants?
- rriepe 7y ago
  Tech companies are inherently better at public relations because they're closer to the consumer. Plenty of people think tech companies are just somehow different when it comes to corporate morality.
- mehrdada 7y ago
  Because their business models and strategic positioning are different? If you are already packaging and selling a database during the course of your day to day business as carriers and credit card companies do, are part of an oligopoly leaving customers no choice, you don’t lose much by disclosing everything indiscriminately to law enforcement. If you peddle privacy in your ads and have a worldwide audience as opposed to US-only, you may have some interest in actually bothering to check a warrant for basic validity at very least, for example (even if it is just for show and marketing; this argument does not presume any sort of moral superiority, although I do personally believe that companies are not all created equal on that dimension either). Also, empirically, I trust Apple and Google to keep data more secure from hackers than AT&T. (I was also careful to use “blanket” requests as opposed to warrant in my original post)
vms20591 7y ago
It would be naive to think that Google, Apple, Twitter, Facebook would be less cooperative. Remember, these are profit making entities. You don't pay them enough to defend you to death (also, thinking you could pay so, would be a fool's errand). So, when its business or you, then you are going under the bus. We can protest all we want and these entities would be ready with their PR script, about how they value their users, blah, blah, blah. Because, they know, at the end of the day, users are going to come back to them, use their platform to protest. Unless there is a mass exodus towards p2p & decentralized network, these entities aren't going to budge, not an inch!
trianglem 7y ago
It’s much harder to tie a burner to a person than a smartphone with a plan and internet usage records.
- MertsA 7y ago
  On the contrary, if you're looking at a particular individual and devoting attention to it then it's generally pretty easy to identify someone based on a detailed record of their location. Case and point, if you've enabled location history for your Google account you can take a look at your own history and see for yourself just how easy it would be to identify someone given the power to subpoena surveillance footage, vehicle registration records, driver's licenses, etc. For my own data for the month of November right off the bat I walked to a nearby McDonald's and paid with a debit card. Even if they didn't have surveillance footage from all of the cameras in the restaurant they still have financial records of the small number of orders that were placed soon after I walked into the restaurant, that combined with the driver's license addresses and vehicle registration records in close proximity to my house would almost immediately identify me. Even just looking at where someone lives is enough to narrow it down to a tiny list of candidates and for >90% of citizens they are going to be on some record as having that address. In short, tax returns generally indicate where you live, as well as specifically state if any dependents that you claim also live with you. Then there's utilities which are just about impossible to avoid, then there's property records which don't need any subpoena as it's literally public records posted on a searchable website for most (all?) of the country. Voter registration data would also tie an individual to an address. USPS, UPS, and Fedex would be another easy way to come up with candidates, the list goes on and on but unless you're homeless you're going to be on a list somewhere. The next day after the McDonalds I drove to WalMart, where I again made purchases with a debit card and walked around in plain view of a plethora of surveillance cameras and again, just from the time of arrival and the time of departure you can narrow down the list of candidates to a relatively small list and I highly doubt any of my immediate neighbors also went to WalMart at the same time as me and left that WalMart at the same time as me. Also even if WalMart did not cooperate with any subpoena or if I paid in cash, it's not uncommon for private companies to drive around with a license plate reader through parking lots cataloging which license plates are present at a location for the purposes of selling that data to repossession companies looking for cars. I drove to that WalMart in a car registered in my name. After that there's a very obvious pattern indicating where I work and when. The company I work for files payroll taxes, none of my coworkers live anywhere near me, assuming it's just less precise positional estimates that a phone company would have for E911 purposes maybe they'd need to also look at the surrounding businesses as well but still, end of the day I think it's highly unlikely that my neighbors right by my house happen to also work right beside my employer. Right after that I travelled to one of our branch offices which would very strongly imply that I work at my specific employer and not the one in the adjacent unit. After that there's more visiting restaurants and gas stations and paying via a debit card as well as visiting my parents house. That's all in the span of a single week. Even with just a coarse history of the location of my phone it's absolutely trivial to identify me specifically. In fact, just off of the property records alone and some public records to determine employment history and family relationships I'd bet it'd be relatively easy enough to identify me by name even ignoring all of the different areas where police could simply subpoena payment records or surveillance footage. Location data, even coarse location data, is definitely enough to identify almost everyone if you're in a position to correlate that with additional records. Unless you have your burner phone turned off almost all of the time, it really doesn't matter if the phone provider doesn't have your name, there's so many other sources.

JohnFen 7y ago

> The carriers have the same data for dumbphones as well as smartphones This is true. But I'm not a privacy absolutist. I'm willing to sacrifice privacy for some things, and having a phone is one of those things. But that I'm willing to put up with that from one company in no way means that I'm willing to put up with that from other companies. > switching away from a smartphone is probably useless if not counterproductive. I don't see how -- can you explain? Reducing data leakage seems useful even if I'm not completely eliminating it, and I don't see how it's actively counterproductive at all.

mehrdada 7y ago
> I don't see how -- can you explain? There is a large amount of $$$ that goes into security of iOS and iPhone (sometimes orthogonal to privacy, sometimes not) that does not go into a dumbphone. The iPhone is also much more scrutinized and researched into than a random dumbphone, so it is plausible that you get much more exposure to exploits, etc., using a dumbphone that does not get updates etc.
- chipperyman573 7y ago
  On the other hand, China is known to have and use ios zero days (souce: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/09/massive_iphone_.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/09/massive_iphon...). It's likely other countries have these as well. It seems unlikely they put the same efforts into finding a zero day for a nokia. There might be a super easy to find zero-day though, like you're saying.
  - xenospn 7y ago
    I would argue that it’s much more likely they’d try to get a person of interest to use a compromised “burner” phone, actually.
  - BoorishBears 7y ago
    If it's anything like the old days, they don't need to horde a 0 day. There were always obscure pieces of software that would pull your forgotten pin right off the device with the right secret code, in which case you have full access to the device. I'd also expect them to be vulnerable to much simpler attacks like just reading flash chips directly
  - sangnoir 7y ago
    > On the other hand, China is known to have and use ios zero days What's your threat-model? If your adversary is a nation-state on par with China, you're probably toast unless you have a well-resourced entity supporting you (think large corporate or another nation-state)
  - scarface74 7y ago
    I’m much less worry about China having my information than the local justice system.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  But the majority of that security is required due to the vulnerabilities that come with the smart part of smartphones. A dumb phone has a much smaller attack surface. If I use the phone solely for texting and the occasional tethering and phone call, my exposure is automatically seriously reduced. The dumb phone has no access to the pocket computer, after all.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  Unlikely. Dumbphones aren't interesting targets and configurations are vastly more heterogeneous. Finding exploits can be a huge amount of work. edit: In a laboratory environment, it is probably easier to break into a dumbphone vs breaking into an iPhone, yes.
mindslight 7y ago
A "smart" phone lets you use software with better protocols than the government approved (designed) cell network. For example, turn off your cell radio but still using a messaging app (eg Matrix/XMPP) over open wifi (rotating macaddrs of course), instead of having to connect to cell towers to receive text messages. I can't tell you which results in better opsec today for say carrying out government-disapproved commerce. But I can tell you that the privacy benefits of having a bona fide computer that you control in your pocket will continue to grow, while the cell network is stuck being forever subservient to government/commercial surveillance.
roywiggins 7y ago
I can't run Signal on a dumbphone, and protecting my data seems more important than my metadata.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  I wouldn't be using the dumbphone for that sort of thing. I'd be using the pocket computer.
  - roywiggins 7y ago
    That's reasonable. A bit cumbersome, but not too bad. It's a shame the Windows client for Signal is an Electron app, which may or may not run well on a small machine.
    - boring_twenties 7y ago
      Imagine being concerned about privacy to the point of building your own pocket computer to carry instead of a smartphone, and then installing Windows on it. I can't even stop laughing at this

giancarlostoro 7y ago

Or own a "burner" type of phone with minimal data about yourself. Alternatively what RMS does is he shuts off his phone and only turns it on when he needs to use it.

bilbo0s 7y ago
Burner phones have a lot more info about you than people think. Or at least I know that in one court case there was a nice big 8x10 of the defendant purchasing a burner phone. Apparently a lot of Point of Sale systems, especially where they sell burner phones, are wired to take a nice portrait of you when you purchase. I didn't know that at the time, and apparently, neither did the defendant. That, combined with the location of his phone matching the location of his license plate around town did him in. So if you try the burner phone thing, someone else has to buy it, and you should never take it with you to places where there are likely to be security cameras. And you also might want to refrain from driving with it in your vehicle.
- jmpman 7y ago
  Not sure if I want to live my life like I’m planning a bank robbery at any minute. Seems more effective to petition your representative to restrict use of this data.
  - ColanR 7y ago
    Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much difference between that and just trying to enjoy a modicum of privacy.
  - a1369209993 7y ago
    Well the assumption when proposing a plan is that we want the plan to actually accomplish something. If we don't care about effectiveness, then "ignore the problem and hope it goes away" is clearly the best option.
  - shoes_for_thee 7y ago
    the fucked up part is that the government is apparently living their life as if you're planning a bank robbery any minute.

keiferski 7y ago

An old iPod touch/tablet with WiFi might be a sufficient replacement.

JohnFen 7y ago
I'm not a fan of the Apple ecosystem, so that doesn't work for me specifically. But I am going to carry a pocket computer that doesn't have cellphone capabilities to replace what I use a smartphone for. And it will be running ordinary Linux, not Android.
- Diederich 7y ago
  Cool; can you share which one you're thinking about using? Thanks.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    I'm building my own.
    - boring_twenties 7y ago
      Don't leave us hanging like that, bro. Are you going to start with a generic ARM dev board, or what?
      - JohnFen 7y ago
        The prototype I have breadboarded up uses an ARM dev board (I'm keeping close to the chip that R-Pis use, so I can leverage that existing code), but the end product will be a PCB of my own design. Once I've completed the project, it's very likely that I'll write it up on one of my websites. I'll submit the link to HN at that time so everyone can see what I've done. The short and sweet, it's an ARM-based micro, with WiFi, Bluetooth, a couple of USB ports and an HDMI output (to use with a HUD that I have). It will have an old-school color 4-inch LCD with resistive touch for its screen (not ideal, but the best I can do right now. I'll work on upgrading that to an OLED w/capactive touch in version 2). It will also have 8 physical buttons, because I like physical buttons. It will be in a 3D printed case. The total size will be roughly the same as an average thin smartphone, but will be a mm or two thicker. It will link up with my watch, which will be the primary way I interact with it on a daily basis. My goal is that 90% of the time I won't need to actually handle the device itself.

everdrive 7y ago

If you mean GSM information it's not quite the same. You can also easily power most non-smartphones off, meaning they won't communicate with the tower.

mehrdada 7y ago
You can theoretically turn off your iPhone easily as well. Unless your dumbphone has a removable battery it would be just as difficult to trust it's actually off than a modern phone. But sure, removable battery would be an advantage on that dimension, I agree.
- grmn 7y ago
  It's a hassle but you can carry the turned-off phone in a small metal box. Feels bad but should work.
  - reaperducer 7y ago
    There was a story on HN a while ago about municipal workers putting their phones in potato chip bags so they couldn't be tracked. Apparently it worked.

StanislavPetrov 7y ago

The carriers have your location data on a dumbphone - only the carriers (certainly not Google) - and that's all the data they have. In addition, I can take the battery out of my dumb phone any time and all their ability to track my location goes away. My dumb phone doesn't have apps and doesn't have wi-fi, which means my data isn't being harvested by every company with an app and every passing wi-fi hotspot. Certainly you'd do better not to carry a phone at all but its just wrong to claim that "the same data" is available (and being broadcast) by your dumb phone.

Spooky23 7y ago

Seriously. Carriers have been selling tower data since the late 90s.

randyrand 7y ago

Not nearly as high accurate as GPS

scarface74 7y ago
Dumb phones have had reliable and accurate GPS since at least 2004-2005.

est31 7y ago

They do have location data but their resolution is much more coarse than Google's, especially in areas with a low cell tower density (rural areas)

pinkfoot 7y ago
Rural location accuracy on GSM and UMTS networks is < 500m for 80% of attempts. Source: it was one of my less-unsuccessful projects :)

mkhpalm 7y ago

> and I bet Verizon and AT&T are much more cooperative than Google and Apple with blanket requests. I'm always confused by statements like this. What makes you think Google and Apple are any different in willingness than Verizon and AT&T? Or what makes anybody think any of them even have a choice turning over data on their users? What do people think other people do when some law enforcement agencies show up on their doorsteps with warrants?

rriepe 7y ago
Tech companies are inherently better at public relations because they're closer to the consumer. Plenty of people think tech companies are just somehow different when it comes to corporate morality.
mehrdada 7y ago
Because their business models and strategic positioning are different? If you are already packaging and selling a database during the course of your day to day business as carriers and credit card companies do, are part of an oligopoly leaving customers no choice, you don’t lose much by disclosing everything indiscriminately to law enforcement. If you peddle privacy in your ads and have a worldwide audience as opposed to US-only, you may have some interest in actually bothering to check a warrant for basic validity at very least, for example (even if it is just for show and marketing; this argument does not presume any sort of moral superiority, although I do personally believe that companies are not all created equal on that dimension either). Also, empirically, I trust Apple and Google to keep data more secure from hackers than AT&T. (I was also careful to use “blanket” requests as opposed to warrant in my original post)

vms20591 7y ago

It would be naive to think that Google, Apple, Twitter, Facebook would be less cooperative. Remember, these are profit making entities. You don't pay them enough to defend you to death (also, thinking you could pay so, would be a fool's errand). So, when its business or you, then you are going under the bus. We can protest all we want and these entities would be ready with their PR script, about how they value their users, blah, blah, blah. Because, they know, at the end of the day, users are going to come back to them, use their platform to protest. Unless there is a mass exodus towards p2p & decentralized network, these entities aren't going to budge, not an inch!

trianglem 7y ago

It’s much harder to tie a burner to a person than a smartphone with a plan and internet usage records.

MertsA 7y ago
On the contrary, if you're looking at a particular individual and devoting attention to it then it's generally pretty easy to identify someone based on a detailed record of their location. Case and point, if you've enabled location history for your Google account you can take a look at your own history and see for yourself just how easy it would be to identify someone given the power to subpoena surveillance footage, vehicle registration records, driver's licenses, etc. For my own data for the month of November right off the bat I walked to a nearby McDonald's and paid with a debit card. Even if they didn't have surveillance footage from all of the cameras in the restaurant they still have financial records of the small number of orders that were placed soon after I walked into the restaurant, that combined with the driver's license addresses and vehicle registration records in close proximity to my house would almost immediately identify me. Even just looking at where someone lives is enough to narrow it down to a tiny list of candidates and for >90% of citizens they are going to be on some record as having that address. In short, tax returns generally indicate where you live, as well as specifically state if any dependents that you claim also live with you. Then there's utilities which are just about impossible to avoid, then there's property records which don't need any subpoena as it's literally public records posted on a searchable website for most (all?) of the country. Voter registration data would also tie an individual to an address. USPS, UPS, and Fedex would be another easy way to come up with candidates, the list goes on and on but unless you're homeless you're going to be on a list somewhere. The next day after the McDonalds I drove to WalMart, where I again made purchases with a debit card and walked around in plain view of a plethora of surveillance cameras and again, just from the time of arrival and the time of departure you can narrow down the list of candidates to a relatively small list and I highly doubt any of my immediate neighbors also went to WalMart at the same time as me and left that WalMart at the same time as me. Also even if WalMart did not cooperate with any subpoena or if I paid in cash, it's not uncommon for private companies to drive around with a license plate reader through parking lots cataloging which license plates are present at a location for the purposes of selling that data to repossession companies looking for cars. I drove to that WalMart in a car registered in my name. After that there's a very obvious pattern indicating where I work and when. The company I work for files payroll taxes, none of my coworkers live anywhere near me, assuming it's just less precise positional estimates that a phone company would have for E911 purposes maybe they'd need to also look at the surrounding businesses as well but still, end of the day I think it's highly unlikely that my neighbors right by my house happen to also work right beside my employer. Right after that I travelled to one of our branch offices which would very strongly imply that I work at my specific employer and not the one in the adjacent unit. After that there's more visiting restaurants and gas stations and paying via a debit card as well as visiting my parents house. That's all in the span of a single week. Even with just a coarse history of the location of my phone it's absolutely trivial to identify me specifically. In fact, just off of the property records alone and some public records to determine employment history and family relationships I'd bet it'd be relatively easy enough to identify me by name even ignoring all of the different areas where police could simply subpoena payment records or surveillance footage. Location data, even coarse location data, is definitely enough to identify almost everyone if you're in a position to correlate that with additional records. Unless you have your burner phone turned off almost all of the time, it really doesn't matter if the phone provider doesn't have your name, there's so many other sources.