Path: csiph.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!news.tcpreset.net!newsgate.tebibyte.org!.POSTED.48.red-79-150-116.dynamicip.rima-tde.net!Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: comp.lang.python,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android,alt.internet.wireless,alt.comp.os.windows-10 Subject: Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 13:30:14 +0200 Organization: Tebibyte_Retro_Gaming Message-ID: <6rj2nmxprs.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> References: <117b5u0$1q77$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <117b9uu$3glj7$1@dont-email.me> <117c8t3$ifv$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <117cmbk$1e7a$3@dont-email.me> <117fmvs$27up$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <117fpti$18lf$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <117hhrg$1jqn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <117hplp$oha$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: mailgate.tebibyte.org; posting-host="48.red-79-150-116.dynamicip.rima-tde.net:79.150.116.48"; logging-data="16279"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@tebibyte.org" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: X-Leafnode-NNTP-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:197972 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:202129 comp.mobile.android:155706 alt.internet.wireless:18993 alt.comp.os.windows-10:195603 On 2026-09-07 12:18, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2026-09-06, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2026-09-06 17:37, Jon Ribbens wrote: >>> 1. Apple are storing the location of "hidden" WiFi Access Points. >>> (My opinion: low priority.) >> >> Only Apple? > > I think that is what Maria is saying, and I have no information to the > contrary. > >>> Allegedly: Apple are adhering to this exclusion, but are not also >>> excluding BSSIDs which are not broadcasting any SSID at all (i.e. >>> "hidden" networks). Other organisations (e.g. Google) do exclude such >>> "hidden" networks. >> >> And if it is hidden they would not see if the SSID ends in _nomap. >> >> But is there a consensus that hidden SSIDs should not be listed? In >> writing? Maybe there is such a consensus now. > > To me it's fairly intuitive that if someone has taken the unusual step > of explicitly marking their network as "hidden", then its location > should not be included in these databases - especially given the fact > that the "_nomap" SSID method doesn't work for "hidden" networks. > >> Related: What did Arlen (aka Maria) achieve? That Apple agreed to >> remove all hidden and _nomap entries, or that they removed only his >> entry? > > My impression is that as a result of Maria's communications with them, > Apple updated their documentation to note that "hidden" networks are > still listed in their database, and removed Maria's own BSSID(s) from > the database. AH! Understood. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;