3 ms·

You should probably read up on how the Google and Apple system works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_/_Apple_contact_tracing_project#Technical_specificat

You should probably read up on how the Google and Apple system works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_/_Apple_contact_tracing_project#Technical_specification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_/_Apple_contact_tracing... My brief understanding: - No location data is used at all - Devices get random rolling identifiers that are shared with other devices when in close range (ie contact is made) - Devices keep a list of which identifiers they came in contact with in the past - If someone tests positive, their recently used random identifiers are published, and any devices with those identifiers in their list notify the user that they may have been in contact with someone who has now tested positive. If you can devise a non-magical way that a Google, Apple, or Subway employee could use that to personally stalk someone it would be quite an interesting whitepaper.

dredmorbius 6y ago
A widely distributed Bluetooth monitoring network noting tims and places ... might ... be able to correlate secrets with other data (facial recognition, MAC, UUID, etc.,) to correlate individual with probable SARS-COV-2 exposure status. An in-location tracking system, such as numerous proposed retail monitoring systems, among othe. Given time and location, a low number of hits would likely be sufficient. This would be expensive, but likely within reason for a motivated entity. Possibly by utilising (with or without cooperation) existing infrastructure and systems.
- stetrain 6y ago
  If you have a widespread Bluetooth monitoring network with centralized data you've already built your stalking system that likely works better than trying to use the Google/Apple contact tracing system.
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    But you've added Covid status detection as a capability. To what net advantage is unclear. Though yes, this shows the inherent risks of pervasive surveillance systems.
- DagAgren 6y ago
  If you have those resources, there are far more effective ways to track people that do not require relying on the contact tracing system.
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    Fair point. The objective is far less practicality or usefulness than of determining possible attacks on the anonymous contact tracing method. Also incidentally highlighting the power and threats of widely-distributed surveillance networks. Inference is powerful.

dredmorbius 6y ago

A widely distributed Bluetooth monitoring network noting tims and places ... might ... be able to correlate secrets with other data (facial recognition, MAC, UUID, etc.,) to correlate individual with probable SARS-COV-2 exposure status. An in-location tracking system, such as numerous proposed retail monitoring systems, among othe. Given time and location, a low number of hits would likely be sufficient. This would be expensive, but likely within reason for a motivated entity. Possibly by utilising (with or without cooperation) existing infrastructure and systems.

stetrain 6y ago
If you have a widespread Bluetooth monitoring network with centralized data you've already built your stalking system that likely works better than trying to use the Google/Apple contact tracing system.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  But you've added Covid status detection as a capability. To what net advantage is unclear. Though yes, this shows the inherent risks of pervasive surveillance systems.
DagAgren 6y ago
If you have those resources, there are far more effective ways to track people that do not require relying on the contact tracing system.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  Fair point. The objective is far less practicality or usefulness than of determining possible attacks on the anonymous contact tracing method. Also incidentally highlighting the power and threats of widely-distributed surveillance networks. Inference is powerful.