10 ms·
Police told not to download NHS Covid-19 app
- bobm_kite9 6y agoThis article is very light on explaining why this might be necessary for the police. Does anyone have any suggestions as to why this advice was issued?
- ampersandy 6y agoMy first thought is that police policy may require security audits/etc. before they have any location tracking software installed on their phones that may potentially be abused to know the location of police.
- adrianmonk 6y agoRight, this could be as simple as deny by default.
- dividuum 6y agoAny app using the Expose notification framework is explicitly forbidden from accessing any kind of location information, either GPS or otherwise. See https://blog.google/documents/72/Exposure_Notifications_Service_Additional_Terms.pdf https://blog.google/documents/72/Exposure_Notifications_Serv... (3 c i) and https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/download/Exposure_Notification_Addendum.pdf https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/download/Exposur... (3.3)
- bargle0 6y agoIt might tip off to people that they are being observed by the police. That would be my guess.
- JD557 6y agoThis seems plausible. I'm not sure how frequently the codes are refreshed, but you could just hide a bluetooth receiver near the police station to get the daily codes for most officers, transmit that to your phone and have an app that tells you if a police officer is nearby.
- JamesBarney 6y agoWon't it just tell you if a police officer is within 2 meters for 15 minutes? Except for undercover or plain clothes police officers this doesn't seem like a big deal.
- sc11 6y agoThe tracing app itself will only tell you that but you can receive the BLE signals with other bluetooth sniffer apps.
- DanBC 6y agoThe key that identifies your phone is changed every 20 minutes. https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013275745685511?s=20 https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013275745685511?...
- niklasrde 6y agoThe codes are refreshed "every ten to twenty minutes" according to the Twitter thread linked above
- dividuum 6y agoA bit of background. Every app that is intended to be actually used by a people essentially must use the framework included in the OS. Otherwise it would run into various roadblocks like not being able to properly run in the background or not having the required BLE access. So that leaves you with using the cross platform exposure notification frameworks on both iOS and Android. The way those work well documented https://covid19.apple.com/contacttracing https://covid19.apple.com/contacttracing. The "Temporary Expose Key" (TEK) changes exactly every 10 minutes. How often the BLE MAC changes depends on the OS, but that's around 10-20 minutes. As you have to change both "fingerprints" at the same time to prevent tracking across individual changes (See also [1]), in practice the sent TEK is changed at the BLE MAC change interval. So that's where to 10-20 minutes come from. [1] A mostly theoretical flaw (as you need a large network of BLE scanners) on some devices: https://hackaday.com/2020/09/03/covid-tracing-framework-privacy-busted-by-bluetooth/ https://hackaday.com/2020/09/03/covid-tracing-framework-priv...
- drcongo 6y agoI'm guessing it's because they come into contact with so many people every day. Especially those policing the recent anti-mask "protests" in Trafalgar Square. Half the force would be self-isolating at any given time. However, it's just as likely that the app is spyware given that it doesn't, and can't link with any COVID tests you have via the NHS, only those done by Serco.
- DanBC 6y ago> and can't link with any COVID tests you have via the NHS They've changed it now so it should now be possible to let most tests performed by a public health authority or an nhs lab be reported on the app.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago> I'm guessing it's because they come into contact with so many people every day. Especially those policing the recent anti-mask "protests" in Trafalgar Square. Half the force would be self-isolating at any given time. This seems like the equivalent of saying that we can't have carbon monoxide alarms in this building because they keep going off.
- winphone1974 6y agoYes, but I would hope that police are more aware of the situation and taking protective measures compared with say 2 people getting together for coffee. If this is the case the definition of contact needs to be different
- mytailorisrich 6y ago> This seems like the equivalent of saying that we can't have carbon monoxide alarms in this building because they keep going off. The comparison works if you add that the building is always filled with CO and that this is a known fact and that people in it are pros and take the appropriate measures. In such case, CO alarms are just noise. Police evolve in a high risk environment and have procedure against that. Because of that and the security requirements of the Police, it has simply been concluded that the downsides of installing a third party tracker on a police phone outweighed the upsides.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y agoCould be mistrust about the anonymity properties of the system, but my guess is that they don't want too many officers to be confirmed as contacts, and thus be forced to self-isolate. If you don't look at the problem, there is no problem!
- kjaftaedi 6y agoIf you assume that officers are following proper protocols (masks, gloves, proper hygiene) .. then I would say that it makes sense to not quarantine everyone that the officers come in contact with.
- nostoc 6y agoIf you assume that everybody follows the proper distancing and wears a mask, we'd have already solved this pandemic 6 months ago. Assuming people will follow proper protocols, whether they are police officers or not, is not a good plan.
- mytailorisrich 6y agoIt's reasonable to assume that Police has procedures that are followed, or at least that are followed infinitely better than the general public. And this has also to be balanced with the fact that the Police requires a high level of security (not a good idea for them to be tracked by a third party app). It's much more important, because much more significant both in term of raw numbers and in term of risk of non compliance, to ensure that the general public follows the same: I was at the supermarket yesterday and the app told me that no less than 5 positive people were inside... with no consequences.
- outworlder 6y ago> It's reasonable to assume that Police has procedures that are followed, or at least that are followed infinitely better than the general public This is not supported by evidence. In other words, the world doesn't function the way we wish it would.
- winphone1974 6y agoMy guess is that contact times and distances are targeting unprotected citizens in their day to day. Police interact with a much more at risk target demographic but with better protection, protocols and awareness. This lack of calibration would probably trigger way more false positives
- iainmerrick 6y agobetter protection, protocols and awareness What do you base that on? I don’t think the police are wearing masks at any greater rate than any other profession, for example. What makes them less at risk? I’d assume that police are being neither more nor less cautious than anyone else, on average, and are at relatively high risk just due to the nature of their jobs. If so it would be beneficial to the police and to everyone else for the police to use COVID contact tracing apps.
- tinus_hn 6y agoRules for thee, not for me. That’s why. The police ‘has better protection’, ‘knows better’ or whatever excuse they come up with. In the end it’s just that, rules are for plebs, not for the police.
- FandangoRanger 6y agoPolice don't like to be spied upon.
- loraa 6y agoWhy would anyone install this period?
- TheGrumpyBrit 6y agoBecause there's a global pandemic in progress and it helps with contact tracing. Privacy concerns and public good are not mutually exclusive.
- Traster 6y agoI think the point worth making is that a bad tracing app is a lot worse than no app at all. It’ll incorrectly give license to people that have been exposed to continue going going out. It’ll incorrectly isolate people who haven’t been exposed, it’ll destroy businesses based on false positives and it’ll destroy the credibility of effective lockdown measures. Given what we know of the uk governments competence, I would want a strong study indicating its effectiveness before I go anywhere near this.
- DanBC 6y agoHere's a Twitter thread of information about this version of the Covid-19 app. https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309008721838772225?s=20 https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309008721838772225?... See especially this: https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013275745685511?s=20 https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013275745685511?... And this: https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013508152078336?s=20 https://twitter.com/hadleybeeman/status/1309013508152078336?... Please don't forget that there isn't a single UK-wide or England-wide police force. There are many small regional forces across England. Quite often they issue advice that's dumb. You'll see a police force's social media team retweeting a "scam alert" that's an obvious hoax. So, we don't know why they've issued this advice and we don't know if they've based that on sensible factual information of some bit of misinformation.
- sadfklsjlkjwt 6y agoThe article makes it clear that it is a nationwide policy.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- notRobot 6y agoIndeed. Here's the subtitle of the article: > The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) has confirmed officers are being told not to install the NHS Covid-19 app on their work smartphones.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- skissane 6y agoIt is a confusingly written article. The subtitle alone would be compatible with the interpretation that NPCC is just reporting on the policy of some of its member forces, rather than actually recommending them to adopt this policy; later on in the article, it implies that it is actually the NPCC's own policy not just NPCC reporting on its member forces' policies. If the subtitle was changed to: "The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) has confirmed it has recommended officers be told not to install the NHS Covid-19 app on their work smartphones" it would be clearer, if that is indeed the correct takeaway from this confusing article.
- mytailorisrich 6y agoIt's reasonable for an employer to decide what apps are allowed on a work phone, especially when it is a police work phone,and when the app's main purpose is tracking. Now, in terms of protection, testing and self-isolation, the police are on the front line, like NHS staff are, and I think that they already have strict procedures that are strictly followed. Therefore, all in all it sounds like that app on a police work phone is lots of risk, little benefits. They can install it on their personal phone if they wish.
- darrenoc 6y agoIt may be reasonable, but it's very poor optics. It makes it seem like they are trying to coverup any possible COVID exposures within the force.
- mytailorisrich 6y agoThe police cannot create security risks for the sake of placating social media users in search of conspiracy theories.
- Daviey 6y agoThe app is said to be secure and privacy preserving, so is it both secure and privacy preserving? If it is, why aren't the police routinely installing it? If the reason is that due to coming into contact with lots of people would skew the results, then this would be manipulation of the data. There is no good answer for this current position.
- kennywinker 6y ago> when the app's main purpose is tracking. If you're telling me to install it, but telling the cops not to install it, you're effectively telling me not to install it. The public is being told these apps are safe and privacy-preserving - if the precautions are not good enough for public officials of any kind, then they're not good enough for me.
- rsynnott 6y agoI know some countries told medical staff not to install these, on the basis that the medical staff would inevitably be in contact with a lot of people, but would (hopefully) be taking precautions.
- detaro 6y agoThey should (and at least some do) have a pause function for that. Stop it while wearing PPE, resume afterwards.
- makomk 6y agoI think the UK app does indeed have such a pause feature, and NHS staff were one of the specific use cases it was aimed for.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y agoA pessimist might consider that more of an attempt to hide a problem than to prevent one, especially considering that many of the medical staff probably will only be using some precautions instead of all of them. My wife who works in the medical field and performs thirty minute to an hour long exams within a foot or two of a patient has been told that because she and the patient are both wearing surgical masks she doesn't have to self isolated if it's revealed the patient had COVID. I don't feel that's an actual representation of the reality, but instead a desire to minimize her downtime.
- radu_floricica 6y agoAFAIK, N95 and disposable gear are definitely enough - I'm going for my 3rd dental checkup since Covid tomorrow, and last I asked they had no infection in the clinic. But they're properly paranoid. Surgical masks in a closed room... I'm skeptical.
- windexh8er 6y agoMy SO is a DDS and has been back to practicing for over 3 months now. Her office has had no infections. My guess is the enhanced pre-screening, the closed wait area, no non-patients allowed, and all of the additional requirements of PPE have contributed very positively to keeping that infection potential suppressed. Staff have been tested a number of time due to concerns but they are strictly following the outlined protocol and have some enhanced requirements the owners have instituted to help keep it that way. This is in the US.
- soneil 6y agoInterestingly, in Ireland the police (Garda) were used as the guinea pigs (pre-release).
- kevinpet 6y agoSimple solution: don't force self isolation. If someone goes to a hospital where staff have been in contact with COVID, then they should take some steps to self isolate. That doesn't mean medical workers needs to stop work.