11 ms·

ADS-B transmissions are not "public data" you can look up, what you're referring to as "public data" are datasets of dubious legality from the likes of flightra

by rosnd 4y ago

ADS-B transmissions are not "public data" you can look up, what you're referring to as "public data" are datasets of dubious legality from the likes of flightradar24 who operate ADS-B logging devices around the world. For example, in Europe what they're doing is strictly in violation of the GDPR.

guitarbill 4y ago
Love the GDPR, but how is ADS-B data personal data?
- jdong 4y ago
  How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    A plane is not a person, a phone, a car, or a home. Elon Musk is often the passenger on his jet, but I am quite sure he is often not on board while it moves around.
    - jdong 4y ago
      Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context?
      - zimpenfish 4y ago
        > Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context? A car is generally registered to an individual. A plane isn't. You could also -maybe- argue that because there's multiple people on the plane (assuming Ol' Muskie isn't flying it himself) and that those people are potentially different every time, without a passenger and crew manifest, it's not identifying individuals (but I suspect you'd not get far with this.)
        jdong 4y ago
        Planes are very often registered to individuals, and that doesn't even matter! The plane being company owned doesn't magically change anything, what matters is who's being transported and whether or not they will be easily linked to the aircraft. From a GDPR perspective it also makes no difference whether it's 5% or 90% of planes that are owned by individuals as opposed to by companies.
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        Do you have some links that support this theory? I'd be interested to read up on it. edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes".
        jdong 4y ago
        >edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes". You have to be trolling. What leads you to believe that the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars would treat these two kinds of vehicles differently? Can you find anything in the GDPR texts to suggest that cars and planes would be treated differently?
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. [2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate-my-personal-data/ https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate...
  - mcv 4y ago
    I think there's something perverse about the very concept of having a personal plane. Perhaps that's the real issue here.
    - jdong 4y ago
      > Perhaps that's the real issue here. I don't see how it could be, that seems like an entirely separate issue.
      - mcv 4y ago
        It's not. If it wasn't his personal plane but a chartered plane or one out of a pool of company planes, this wouldn't be an issue.
        jdong 4y ago
        Who gives a shit about Elon? What the ADS-B data brokers are doing will continue to be illegal even if Elon never steps on a flight again.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in the US and Europe.
        jdong 4y ago
        As far as I can see, nobody here has made any claims regarding anything being illegal in the US. > Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in Europe https://gdpr-info.eu/ https://gdpr-info.eu/ What kind of evidence do you want exactly? This is crystal clear to anyone with the most basic understanding of the GDPR.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        That’s not evidence. That’s just your opinion, based on your assumption that private aircraft are like private cars under the law. Except that they have never been treated equivalently in any legal venue or government regulation.
  - monkpit 4y ago
    There are services you can pay for (in the US) to track a car’s (almost) real-time location without gps. It’s based upon license plates and widespread webcams and it’s not illegal (yet).
    - jdong 4y ago
      Yes, but in the EU this would be illegal. https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegian-public-roads-administration/ https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegia...
- emodendroket 4y ago
  In the GDPR sense any information that can be tied directly to a person is "personal data" but since nobody in this story lives in Europe I think it's neither here nor there that this is the case.
  - jdong 4y ago
    GDPR has nothing to do with whether or not you live in Europe. The plane we're discussing here does frequently visit Europe.
    - fragmede 4y ago
      Does it? I'd look it up but, well, @ElonJet i.u suspended. it seems it mostly goes between SF, LA, and Austin though. It's a G700 which has a range of 8,053 mi though. Also, given that the GDPR only applies to people of the EU, I'd say it, at the very least, has something to do with living in Europe, since, umm, y'know, that's where most people with citizenship in an EU county live.
      - jdong 4y ago
        GDPR does not only apply to people of the EU, GDPR applies within the jurisdiction of the states which have implemented it. GDPR protects Musk when he flies to Europe, you'd have to treat that data differently than flights within the US.
        fragmede 4y ago
        TIL, thanks! https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0dc9663d-ac3b-438e-adcd-1415a45f99ca https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0dc9663d-ac3b...
        emodendroket 4y ago
        This is all well and good but even if the EU claims jurisdiction over people who aren’t in the EU publishing information about the EU (not clear from this article that this is the case; it just says that it applies to you if you are in the EU even if you’re not an EU citizen), how would they enforce that?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
stonogo 4y ago
You might want to investigate what the "B" in "ADS-B" stands for.
- jdong 4y ago
  The comment you're replying to perfectly addresses that.
ladyattis 4y ago
Nope, you can get an SDR dongle and track planes all you want all the time even in the EU. Plane doesn't equal person, and I doubt the EU courts would argue any other way otherwise we'd need to criminalize tracking of UPS trucks and the like.
- rosnd 4y ago
  > Nope, you can get an SDR dongle and track planes all you want all the time even in the EU For example in Finland you would likely be violating the radio secrecy laws by merely listening unless you're actively involved in aviation (e.g. flying a plane or sitting in a tower) In all EU countries you would be violating the GDPR if you stored this data without a lawful basis. (If you're wondering what constitutes "lawful basis", here's a helpful tool https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gdpr-resources/lawful-basis-interactive-guidance-tool/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gdpr-resources/lawful-b...) > I doubt the EU courts would argue any other way otherwise we'd need to criminalize tracking of UPS trucks and the like Why would the GDPR prevent UPS from tracking their own trucks? How is this even remotely related to what we're discussing here?
  - _djo_ 4y ago
    GDPR does not apply to the movements of aircraft, not even private jets. Somehow getting, storing, and sharing passenger manifests would constitute PII of the sort that falls under GDPR.
    - rosnd 4y ago
      >GDPR does not apply to the movements of aircraft, not even private jets. It sure as hell does, just like it applies to movements of cars and movements of mobile phones. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...
      - _djo_ 4y ago

by rosnd 4y ago

guitarbill 4y ago

Love the GDPR, but how is ADS-B data personal data?

jdong 4y ago
How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.
- kennywinker 4y ago
  A plane is not a person, a phone, a car, or a home. Elon Musk is often the passenger on his jet, but I am quite sure he is often not on board while it moves around.
  - jdong 4y ago
    Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context?
    - zimpenfish 4y ago
      > Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context? A car is generally registered to an individual. A plane isn't. You could also -maybe- argue that because there's multiple people on the plane (assuming Ol' Muskie isn't flying it himself) and that those people are potentially different every time, without a passenger and crew manifest, it's not identifying individuals (but I suspect you'd not get far with this.)
      - jdong 4y ago
        Planes are very often registered to individuals, and that doesn't even matter! The plane being company owned doesn't magically change anything, what matters is who's being transported and whether or not they will be easily linked to the aircraft. From a GDPR perspective it also makes no difference whether it's 5% or 90% of planes that are owned by individuals as opposed to by companies.
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        Do you have some links that support this theory? I'd be interested to read up on it. edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes".
        jdong 4y ago
        >edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes". You have to be trolling. What leads you to believe that the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars would treat these two kinds of vehicles differently? Can you find anything in the GDPR texts to suggest that cars and planes would be treated differently?
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. [2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate-my-personal-data/ https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate...
- mcv 4y ago
  I think there's something perverse about the very concept of having a personal plane. Perhaps that's the real issue here.
  - jdong 4y ago
    > Perhaps that's the real issue here. I don't see how it could be, that seems like an entirely separate issue.
    - mcv 4y ago
      It's not. If it wasn't his personal plane but a chartered plane or one out of a pool of company planes, this wouldn't be an issue.
      - jdong 4y ago
        Who gives a shit about Elon? What the ADS-B data brokers are doing will continue to be illegal even if Elon never steps on a flight again.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in the US and Europe.
        jdong 4y ago
        As far as I can see, nobody here has made any claims regarding anything being illegal in the US. > Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in Europe https://gdpr-info.eu/ https://gdpr-info.eu/ What kind of evidence do you want exactly? This is crystal clear to anyone with the most basic understanding of the GDPR.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        That’s not evidence. That’s just your opinion, based on your assumption that private aircraft are like private cars under the law. Except that they have never been treated equivalently in any legal venue or government regulation.
- monkpit 4y ago
  There are services you can pay for (in the US) to track a car’s (almost) real-time location without gps. It’s based upon license plates and widespread webcams and it’s not illegal (yet).
  - jdong 4y ago
    Yes, but in the EU this would be illegal. https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegian-public-roads-administration/ https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegia...
emodendroket 4y ago
In the GDPR sense any information that can be tied directly to a person is "personal data" but since nobody in this story lives in Europe I think it's neither here nor there that this is the case.
- jdong 4y ago
  GDPR has nothing to do with whether or not you live in Europe. The plane we're discussing here does frequently visit Europe.
  - fragmede 4y ago
    Does it? I'd look it up but, well, @ElonJet i.u suspended. it seems it mostly goes between SF, LA, and Austin though. It's a G700 which has a range of 8,053 mi though. Also, given that the GDPR only applies to people of the EU, I'd say it, at the very least, has something to do with living in Europe, since, umm, y'know, that's where most people with citizenship in an EU county live.
    - jdong 4y ago
      GDPR does not only apply to people of the EU, GDPR applies within the jurisdiction of the states which have implemented it. GDPR protects Musk when he flies to Europe, you'd have to treat that data differently than flights within the US.
      - fragmede 4y ago
        TIL, thanks! https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0dc9663d-ac3b-438e-adcd-1415a45f99ca https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0dc9663d-ac3b...
        emodendroket 4y ago
        This is all well and good but even if the EU claims jurisdiction over people who aren’t in the EU publishing information about the EU (not clear from this article that this is the case; it just says that it applies to you if you are in the EU even if you’re not an EU citizen), how would they enforce that?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

stonogo 4y ago

You might want to investigate what the "B" in "ADS-B" stands for.

jdong 4y ago
The comment you're replying to perfectly addresses that.

ladyattis 4y ago

Nope, you can get an SDR dongle and track planes all you want all the time even in the EU. Plane doesn't equal person, and I doubt the EU courts would argue any other way otherwise we'd need to criminalize tracking of UPS trucks and the like.

rosnd 4y ago
> Nope, you can get an SDR dongle and track planes all you want all the time even in the EU For example in Finland you would likely be violating the radio secrecy laws by merely listening unless you're actively involved in aviation (e.g. flying a plane or sitting in a tower) In all EU countries you would be violating the GDPR if you stored this data without a lawful basis. (If you're wondering what constitutes "lawful basis", here's a helpful tool https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gdpr-resources/lawful-basis-interactive-guidance-tool/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gdpr-resources/lawful-b...) > I doubt the EU courts would argue any other way otherwise we'd need to criminalize tracking of UPS trucks and the like Why would the GDPR prevent UPS from tracking their own trucks? How is this even remotely related to what we're discussing here?
- _djo_ 4y ago
  GDPR does not apply to the movements of aircraft, not even private jets. Somehow getting, storing, and sharing passenger manifests would constitute PII of the sort that falls under GDPR.
  - rosnd 4y ago
    >GDPR does not apply to the movements of aircraft, not even private jets. It sure as hell does, just like it applies to movements of cars and movements of mobile phones. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...
    - _djo_ 4y ago