There is a proposal to create an IETF working group for protocol revisions to make unwanted trackers detectable in a standarized way: https://datatracker.ietf.

There is a proposal to create an IETF working group for protocol revisions to make unwanted trackers detectable in a standarized way: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dult/about/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dult/about/ At the recent meeting there was much debate over the charter but a lot of support for doing work in that areas. ( meeting minutes: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-117-dult-202307271630/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-117-dult-2023072716... ). Related draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-detecting-unwanted-location-trackers/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-detecting-unwanted-lo... During the meeting I raised a scoping question: would proposals for protocols to suppress tracker reporting at locations be out of scope? In cases where you want to protect a particular location from tracking it might be superior to have something beacon to disable reporting, particularly because the trackers are attacker controlled but the reporting devices aren't (if they are, you already lost) and because detection is too late: your opponent may have learned your location by the time you detect the tracker.