10 ms·

City of Houston does MAC address tracking on the freeways and surface streets to power their traffic tracking measures. It's probably used in hundreds of other

City of Houston does MAC address tracking on the freeways and surface streets to power their traffic tracking measures. It's probably used in hundreds of other places you haven't thought about. If you're concerned about your privacy just turn wifi off. http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/layers/ http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/layers/

parennoob 13y ago
> If you're concerned about your privacy just turn wifi off. No, you shouldn't have to turn off a very commonly used service so that people can do better business by tracking it in an intrusive manner. Privacy should be the default option in such programs. If the city used a ton of cameras + facial recognition to track you and your car everywhere and then sold that data to companies so they could optimize for whatever meaningless metric, would you still be as casual about this, and go "Oh, you should just cover your face and walk everywhere if you expect privacy."?
- shiftpgdn 13y ago
  It's trivial to turn off the wireless on your phone. If you want privacy in this day and age it's not going to be convenient. The difference is I can't turn off my face.
  - reddit_clone 13y ago
    I blame the WiFi protocol. Since the routers are already broadcasting their SSID why are devices themselves broadcasting sensitive information back to them before the user has shown any interest in any particular hotspot? This over sharing should be addressed at protocol level.
    - ajcarpy2005 13y ago
      Maybe it's needed for ad-hoc networks between peers without a router. But maybe a one-time key would work?
- jonknee 13y ago
  > No, you shouldn't have to turn off a very commonly used service so that people can do better business by tracking it in an intrusive manner. Privacy should be the default option in such programs. Maybe, maybe not, but if you care about your privacy you shouldn't assume everyone will follow the rules. Opt-in would be tough too--they need to know who you are before knowing if you have opted in.
- Karunamon 13y ago
  Devil's advocate mode: What privacy is that? Your device is broadcasting information, in the clear, to anyone who cares to receive that information. You've taken no steps to prevent anyone from receiving that information. Your device is doing the equivalent of standing on the street corner and screaming various things. You can't rightly tell someone not to listen or write down what's being said. I don't see how this is any more invasive than CCTV cameras that every business already has anyways.
  - joeshaw 13y ago
    > Your device is doing the equivalent of standing on the street corner and screaming various things. Except there's one huge difference: anyone with eyes and ears can understand what the person is screaming. I would wager that even fewer than half of HN readers realize what's being broadcasted here. What you're saying is that every human must have complete technological and implementation knowledge of any possible invention or they are not deserving of privacy. That position is not only elitist as a technophile, it's arrogant to think that any one person could possess that knowledge, let alone billions. At some point, you'll be the clueless one.
    - Karunamon 13y ago
      And anyone with a smartphone (or any other reasonably general purpose device with a 802.11 radio) can "understand" (read: pick MAC addresses out of a WiFi ping). This isn't some hidden, elite, arcane black-arts knowledge as you imply, this is standard stuff. The idea that MACs should be somehow private because someone found a novel use for them doesn't even pass the laugh test. IP addresses are not "private". Your face out in a public area is not "private". Why is this different? How is this somehow worse than the CCTV cameras in most public places anyways? How is a MAC address PII by any stretch of the word? I'm starting to really think "privacy" has joined the heap along with "patriotism", "socialism", and "terrorist", words which are being abused so badly they've lost all meaning and and as a result mean whatever their speaker wishes them to. >That position is not only elitist as a technophile One shouldn't hold strong opinions about things they don't understand even on a remedial level. This hand wringing is pure and simple fear mongering.
rsync 13y ago
... or you could just alter your MAC address to something non personally identifiable (00:00:00....) ... possibly rotating random ones, or whatever. The point is, this is trivially defeated without turning wifi off.
- nathancahill 13y ago
  Relevant: http://xkcd.com/1105/ http://xkcd.com/1105/
  - hrjet 13y ago
    A better idea might be periodically changing and random MAC address.
  - michaelbuckbee 13y ago
    Surprisingly actually happened: http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/noplate.asp http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/noplate.asp
    - mkessy 13y ago
      Poorly designed forms. If there is no plate, leave the plate field blank, then check a box for no plate.
tracker1 13y ago
Does this still work when you disable wifi on your phone?
- xauronx 13y ago
  no
  - zeckalpha 13y ago
    If you also disable Bluetooth.
adamfeldman 13y ago
I live in Houston and never knew how it worked. I assumed they only used the toll tags. It's actually not wifi, but rather bluetooth: http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/bluetooth/transtar_bluetooth.html http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/bluetooth/transtar_blueto.... I am not sure if the bluetooth radio on the phones uses a different MAC than the wifi radio.
- andrewfarah 13y ago
  The bluetooth address is actually just one character different from the phone's MAC address -- although this might just be an iPhone standard. Need to check up on Android standards and if it differs by manufacturer. What makes WiFi (currently) more relevant is more people leave it on. Likely to even out over time as more bluetooth devices are made commonplace.
  - ansible 13y ago
    There is no guarantee that the BT MAC address is related to the WiFi MAC address for a given device. These addresses may be assigned by the product (phone) manufacturer, they may also be assigned by who makes the BT or WiFi module.
dfc 13y ago
The Houston system uses bluetooth, not 802.11.
- shiftpgdn 13y ago
  Bluetooth uses MAC addresses as well FYI.
  - dfc 13y ago
    I realize that. However you brought up the Houston system in response to a comment that only discussed wifi. After bringing up the Houston system in your comment you said people concerned about privacy should "just turn wifi off." Anyone coming along and reading this thread would realistically conclude that the Houston system used WiFi and that they could avoid the Houston system's tracking by "just turning wifi off." I thought it would be important to let others know that "just turning wifi off" would not be an effective measure against a system that uses bluetooth.

parennoob 13y ago

> If you're concerned about your privacy just turn wifi off. No, you shouldn't have to turn off a very commonly used service so that people can do better business by tracking it in an intrusive manner. Privacy should be the default option in such programs. If the city used a ton of cameras + facial recognition to track you and your car everywhere and then sold that data to companies so they could optimize for whatever meaningless metric, would you still be as casual about this, and go "Oh, you should just cover your face and walk everywhere if you expect privacy."?

shiftpgdn 13y ago
It's trivial to turn off the wireless on your phone. If you want privacy in this day and age it's not going to be convenient. The difference is I can't turn off my face.
- reddit_clone 13y ago
  I blame the WiFi protocol. Since the routers are already broadcasting their SSID why are devices themselves broadcasting sensitive information back to them before the user has shown any interest in any particular hotspot? This over sharing should be addressed at protocol level.
  - ajcarpy2005 13y ago
    Maybe it's needed for ad-hoc networks between peers without a router. But maybe a one-time key would work?
jonknee 13y ago
> No, you shouldn't have to turn off a very commonly used service so that people can do better business by tracking it in an intrusive manner. Privacy should be the default option in such programs. Maybe, maybe not, but if you care about your privacy you shouldn't assume everyone will follow the rules. Opt-in would be tough too--they need to know who you are before knowing if you have opted in.
Karunamon 13y ago
Devil's advocate mode: What privacy is that? Your device is broadcasting information, in the clear, to anyone who cares to receive that information. You've taken no steps to prevent anyone from receiving that information. Your device is doing the equivalent of standing on the street corner and screaming various things. You can't rightly tell someone not to listen or write down what's being said. I don't see how this is any more invasive than CCTV cameras that every business already has anyways.
- joeshaw 13y ago
  > Your device is doing the equivalent of standing on the street corner and screaming various things. Except there's one huge difference: anyone with eyes and ears can understand what the person is screaming. I would wager that even fewer than half of HN readers realize what's being broadcasted here. What you're saying is that every human must have complete technological and implementation knowledge of any possible invention or they are not deserving of privacy. That position is not only elitist as a technophile, it's arrogant to think that any one person could possess that knowledge, let alone billions. At some point, you'll be the clueless one.
  - Karunamon 13y ago
    And anyone with a smartphone (or any other reasonably general purpose device with a 802.11 radio) can "understand" (read: pick MAC addresses out of a WiFi ping). This isn't some hidden, elite, arcane black-arts knowledge as you imply, this is standard stuff. The idea that MACs should be somehow private because someone found a novel use for them doesn't even pass the laugh test. IP addresses are not "private". Your face out in a public area is not "private". Why is this different? How is this somehow worse than the CCTV cameras in most public places anyways? How is a MAC address PII by any stretch of the word? I'm starting to really think "privacy" has joined the heap along with "patriotism", "socialism", and "terrorist", words which are being abused so badly they've lost all meaning and and as a result mean whatever their speaker wishes them to. >That position is not only elitist as a technophile One shouldn't hold strong opinions about things they don't understand even on a remedial level. This hand wringing is pure and simple fear mongering.

rsync 13y ago

... or you could just alter your MAC address to something non personally identifiable (00:00:00....) ... possibly rotating random ones, or whatever. The point is, this is trivially defeated without turning wifi off.

nathancahill 13y ago
Relevant: http://xkcd.com/1105/ http://xkcd.com/1105/
- hrjet 13y ago
  A better idea might be periodically changing and random MAC address.
- michaelbuckbee 13y ago
  Surprisingly actually happened: http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/noplate.asp http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/noplate.asp
  - mkessy 13y ago
    Poorly designed forms. If there is no plate, leave the plate field blank, then check a box for no plate.

tracker1 13y ago

Does this still work when you disable wifi on your phone?

xauronx 13y ago
no
- zeckalpha 13y ago
  If you also disable Bluetooth.

adamfeldman 13y ago

I live in Houston and never knew how it worked. I assumed they only used the toll tags. It's actually not wifi, but rather bluetooth: http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/bluetooth/transtar_bluetooth.html http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/bluetooth/transtar_blueto.... I am not sure if the bluetooth radio on the phones uses a different MAC than the wifi radio.

andrewfarah 13y ago
The bluetooth address is actually just one character different from the phone's MAC address -- although this might just be an iPhone standard. Need to check up on Android standards and if it differs by manufacturer. What makes WiFi (currently) more relevant is more people leave it on. Likely to even out over time as more bluetooth devices are made commonplace.
- ansible 13y ago
  There is no guarantee that the BT MAC address is related to the WiFi MAC address for a given device. These addresses may be assigned by the product (phone) manufacturer, they may also be assigned by who makes the BT or WiFi module.

dfc 13y ago

The Houston system uses bluetooth, not 802.11.

shiftpgdn 13y ago
Bluetooth uses MAC addresses as well FYI.
- dfc 13y ago
  I realize that. However you brought up the Houston system in response to a comment that only discussed wifi. After bringing up the Houston system in your comment you said people concerned about privacy should "just turn wifi off." Anyone coming along and reading this thread would realistically conclude that the Houston system used WiFi and that they could avoid the Houston system's tracking by "just turning wifi off." I thought it would be important to let others know that "just turning wifi off" would not be an effective measure against a system that uses bluetooth.