6 ms·

How police use location/search data to find suspects - not always the right ones

60 points by c420 3y ago

autoexec 3y ago
Wow, I thought this article was talking about a different guy entirely. The difference between the photo in TFA vs the one here (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike-ride-past-burglarized-home-made-him-n1151761 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike...) is just insane! Crazy how much can change in a few short years! Good on ya Zach! I think I need to get a bike... (and leave my cell phone at home)
kurthr 3y ago
If their sample rate and position accuracy was even remotely acceptable, then it should be obvious he was riding past and didn't spend more 1 minute with 100m of the location. They should only have been asking whether he saw anything suspicious. What if an airplane flew over during the burglary? Are they suspects? OTOH if it showed that his position was static within 10m of the home for 20min before leaving again... then that might be evidence. Almost all of us leave huge digital footprints that can be followed with a warrant (not sure about UK). That can be used for pretexting, but can also be used as an alibi.
- autoexec 3y ago
  The data google had was enough to show that he wasn't the thief, but the police didn't bother digging that deep. They just took their easy answer and ran with it. He would have been cleared in court, but there's zero reason we should let lazy cops force us to spend time in jail or spend thousands on lawyers to avoid that fate. This needs to get regulated.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > He would have been cleared in court Plus, in many US states, you never get fully cleared. Just having a record that you've been arrested -- regardless of the ultimate outcome of that arrest or whether or not you were cleared in court -- can keep you from renting housing, getting jobs, etc.
gleenn 3y ago
For people who talk a lot of crap about Apple for advertising privacy but not delivering: Google responded to the government 84% of the time "with some data" out of 20,000 times requested in 2 years. Apple received 13 requests and returned information ZERO times. It turns out that if you don't store that incredibly lucrative data about users, you can't be on the hook to hand it over in sweeping data requests. Apple may not be perfect, but that has teeth. Full disclosure I work at Apple, thoughts are my own.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- candiddevmike 3y ago
  I think you're mixing up the numbers. The 84% for Google is for the second half of 2020, the 20k number is for the two years previously, and the 13 for Apple were just the first half of 2022.
  - gleenn 3y ago
    My mistake. I think my point stands. Google benefits from location data and ends up having to hand it over to law enforcement to the detriment of customers. Apple doesn't do either.
ziddoap 3y ago
>Now, Apple has taken steps to publish its own numbers, revealing that in the first half of 2022 the company fielded a total of 13 geofence warrants and complied with none. The difference? According to Apple’s transparency report, the company doesn’t have any data to provide in response. 13 geofence warrants for Apple vs. ~3500 (21000 from 2018-2020, averaged to 6 mo) for Google. That's a pretty stark difference. (I do wish they had/gave the numbers for Apple over the same 2018-2020 time period or at least covering a couple years for a more apple-apple comparison). While Apple isn't perfect (plenty of fumbles along the way and still), seeing stats like this make me feel a little more comfortable with my iPhone compared to my Android.
- bilbo0s 3y ago
  My belief is that this is why we need a law saying no use of user information for any commercial purposes. With draconian penalties assessed per user-incident. Bonus points awarded for legislation that pierces the veil. So you want to play games and you "leaked" a million user records to your business partner? That's a million fines slick. Oh, you "leaked" them to your business partner again the next week? No problem tough guy, that's a million more draconian fines. We can play this game all the way to your bankruptcy pal. We need to stop these tech companies from trampling privacy and the only way to do it is to hit them extremely hard where it hurts.
  - jliptzin 3y ago
    Who are those fines paid to? The government slush fund? Or to the people actually impacted by the leak?
  - almostnormal 3y ago
    How about jail time?
    - bilbo0s 3y ago
      Jail time? I'd never dare to hope for jail time. But if I could get a majority of americans supporting jail time as well for these guys, man, that'd be, just, chef's kiss. Seriously. I don't think they need all this privacy trampling stuff to make money. Apple makes a mint, so these companies clearly don't even have to trample privacy to make money. They just do it because "F you user!"
99_00 3y ago
The article presents no evidence to support that Zachary McCoy was a ever a suspect. If it turns out that he was present at multiple break-ins, or he spoke to police and gave suspicious and inconsistent responses that might have changed.
luuurker 3y ago
Let's say you pause every "history" option (location, search, etc) in your Google Account settings. Would you still be part of this information they provide to the police?
- eth0up 3y ago
  Perhaps you're asking rhetorically. Perhaps not. Of ducking bloody course! Simply peruse Running services in Developer Options and proceed to purchase bulk quantities of Preparation H to ease the grievous pang. Android is a surveillance framework. It merely happens to be useful to the products utilizing it. Go forth boldly with your new understanding, oh lurker. And may your anonymity and dignity endure. But don't get your hopes up.
- havnagiggle 3y ago
  I believe there were 2 settled lawsuits with Google that they have multiple locations tracking settings for different products, and turning one off did not turn the others off. So I think you can turn all tracking off, but it was not clear to consumers that you've actually done the thing you wanted. There was a CA lawsuit and an everyone-else lawsuit [2]. I don't know if Google's settings have changed since these lawsuits, but I think as part of the settlement they would have to do something about it. [1] https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-announces-93-million-settlement-regarding-google%E2%80%99s#:~:text=OAKLAND%20%E2%80%94%20California%20Attorney%20General%20Rob,violated%20California%20consumer%20protection%20laws https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont.... [2] https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2022-11-14/40-states-settle-google-location-tracking-charges-for-392m https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2022-11-14/40-...
jstarfish 3y ago
> But geofence warrants are sweeping in nature and are often used to compile a suspect list to further investigate. Yes, this is how investigations work. The actual problem with this approach is that it's lazy and assumes everybody involved in the crime is on-the-grid. Criminals could subvert the whole process and fill the dragnet with false leads by refusing to carry a phone.

60 points by c420 3y ago

Wow, I thought this article was talking about a different guy entirely. The difference between the photo in TFA vs the one here (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike-ride-past-burglarized-home-made-him-n1151761 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike...) is just insane! Crazy how much can change in a few short years! Good on ya Zach! I think I need to get a bike... (and leave my cell phone at home)

kurthr 3y ago

If their sample rate and position accuracy was even remotely acceptable, then it should be obvious he was riding past and didn't spend more 1 minute with 100m of the location. They should only have been asking whether he saw anything suspicious. What if an airplane flew over during the burglary? Are they suspects? OTOH if it showed that his position was static within 10m of the home for 20min before leaving again... then that might be evidence. Almost all of us leave huge digital footprints that can be followed with a warrant (not sure about UK). That can be used for pretexting, but can also be used as an alibi.

autoexec 3y ago
The data google had was enough to show that he wasn't the thief, but the police didn't bother digging that deep. They just took their easy answer and ran with it. He would have been cleared in court, but there's zero reason we should let lazy cops force us to spend time in jail or spend thousands on lawyers to avoid that fate. This needs to get regulated.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > He would have been cleared in court Plus, in many US states, you never get fully cleared. Just having a record that you've been arrested -- regardless of the ultimate outcome of that arrest or whether or not you were cleared in court -- can keep you from renting housing, getting jobs, etc.

gleenn 3y ago

For people who talk a lot of crap about Apple for advertising privacy but not delivering: Google responded to the government 84% of the time "with some data" out of 20,000 times requested in 2 years. Apple received 13 requests and returned information ZERO times. It turns out that if you don't store that incredibly lucrative data about users, you can't be on the hook to hand it over in sweeping data requests. Apple may not be perfect, but that has teeth. Full disclosure I work at Apple, thoughts are my own.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
candiddevmike 3y ago
I think you're mixing up the numbers. The 84% for Google is for the second half of 2020, the 20k number is for the two years previously, and the 13 for Apple were just the first half of 2022.
- gleenn 3y ago
  My mistake. I think my point stands. Google benefits from location data and ends up having to hand it over to law enforcement to the detriment of customers. Apple doesn't do either.

ziddoap 3y ago

>Now, Apple has taken steps to publish its own numbers, revealing that in the first half of 2022 the company fielded a total of 13 geofence warrants and complied with none. The difference? According to Apple’s transparency report, the company doesn’t have any data to provide in response. 13 geofence warrants for Apple vs. ~3500 (21000 from 2018-2020, averaged to 6 mo) for Google. That's a pretty stark difference. (I do wish they had/gave the numbers for Apple over the same 2018-2020 time period or at least covering a couple years for a more apple-apple comparison). While Apple isn't perfect (plenty of fumbles along the way and still), seeing stats like this make me feel a little more comfortable with my iPhone compared to my Android.

bilbo0s 3y ago
My belief is that this is why we need a law saying no use of user information for any commercial purposes. With draconian penalties assessed per user-incident. Bonus points awarded for legislation that pierces the veil. So you want to play games and you "leaked" a million user records to your business partner? That's a million fines slick. Oh, you "leaked" them to your business partner again the next week? No problem tough guy, that's a million more draconian fines. We can play this game all the way to your bankruptcy pal. We need to stop these tech companies from trampling privacy and the only way to do it is to hit them extremely hard where it hurts.
- jliptzin 3y ago
  Who are those fines paid to? The government slush fund? Or to the people actually impacted by the leak?
- almostnormal 3y ago
  How about jail time?
  - bilbo0s 3y ago
    Jail time? I'd never dare to hope for jail time. But if I could get a majority of americans supporting jail time as well for these guys, man, that'd be, just, chef's kiss. Seriously. I don't think they need all this privacy trampling stuff to make money. Apple makes a mint, so these companies clearly don't even have to trample privacy to make money. They just do it because "F you user!"

99_00 3y ago

The article presents no evidence to support that Zachary McCoy was a ever a suspect. If it turns out that he was present at multiple break-ins, or he spoke to police and gave suspicious and inconsistent responses that might have changed.

luuurker 3y ago

Let's say you pause every "history" option (location, search, etc) in your Google Account settings. Would you still be part of this information they provide to the police?

eth0up 3y ago
Perhaps you're asking rhetorically. Perhaps not. Of ducking bloody course! Simply peruse Running services in Developer Options and proceed to purchase bulk quantities of Preparation H to ease the grievous pang. Android is a surveillance framework. It merely happens to be useful to the products utilizing it. Go forth boldly with your new understanding, oh lurker. And may your anonymity and dignity endure. But don't get your hopes up.
havnagiggle 3y ago
I believe there were 2 settled lawsuits with Google that they have multiple locations tracking settings for different products, and turning one off did not turn the others off. So I think you can turn all tracking off, but it was not clear to consumers that you've actually done the thing you wanted. There was a CA lawsuit and an everyone-else lawsuit [2]. I don't know if Google's settings have changed since these lawsuits, but I think as part of the settlement they would have to do something about it. [1] https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-announces-93-million-settlement-regarding-google%E2%80%99s#:~:text=OAKLAND%20%E2%80%94%20California%20Attorney%20General%20Rob,violated%20California%20consumer%20protection%20laws https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont.... [2] https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2022-11-14/40-states-settle-google-location-tracking-charges-for-392m https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2022-11-14/40-...

jstarfish 3y ago

> But geofence warrants are sweeping in nature and are often used to compile a suspect list to further investigate. Yes, this is how investigations work. The actual problem with this approach is that it's lazy and assumes everybody involved in the crime is on-the-grid. Criminals could subvert the whole process and fill the dragnet with false leads by refusing to carry a phone.