Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #155580 > unrolled thread

Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-03 16:30 +0930
    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-03 08:09 +0000
      Apple tracking of WLAN APs (was: Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-03 11:19 +0100
        Re: Apple tracking of WLAN APs (was: Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy) Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 22:58 +0000
      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-04 02:27 +0930
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-03 20:46 +0000
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 06:15 +0600
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 00:34 +0000
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:05 +0600
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 01:47 +0000
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:00 -0300
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-05 17:49 +0000
                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 16:14 -0300
                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-06 00:06 +0000
                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-06 13:39 +0200
                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-06 15:37 +0000
                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-06 20:23 +0200
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 02:16 +0300
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:42 +0200
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:06 +0300
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-07 19:11 +0100
                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 21:29 +0200
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 05:58 +0300
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:57 +0100
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 21:28 +0200
                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 06:38 +0300
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:48 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:36 +0400
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-08 10:09 +0100
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:28 -0700
                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-08 00:46 +0100
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 06:58 +0300
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 07:39 +0000
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 08:58 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-08 10:18 +0100
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 12:02 +0200
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "....winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 02:01 -0400
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-07 01:47 -0500
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-07 10:18 +0000
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:30 +0200
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:22 +0300
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 22:28 +0000
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 01:50 +0200
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:29 +0300
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:22 +0300
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 07:24 +0000
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-08 10:44 +0000
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 13:27 +0000
                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 09:47 -0600
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 19:51 +0300
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-08 10:23 -0700
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 18:12 +0000
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:18 +0400
                                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-09 19:46 -0700
                                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-10 09:38 +0200
                                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-10 10:21 +0000
                                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 07:45 +0000
                                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-11 09:49 -0700
                                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-11 19:29 +0200
                                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-11 20:26 +0200
                                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-25 23:43 +0800
                                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-09-25 13:14 -0700
                                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-26 04:41 +0800
                                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-25 22:17 +0000
                                                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-26 07:26 +0800
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 18:59 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 21:20 +0400
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 19:37 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2026-09-08 17:56 +0000
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:03 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-09 11:11 +0100
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 19:26 +0200
                                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 11:36 -0600
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:05 +0200
                                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:35 +0200
                                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 19:06 +0000
                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-07 10:47 +0100
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:34 +0200
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:48 +0200
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:46 +0100
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-07 14:04 +0000
                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:47 +0300
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-09-05 01:11 +0000
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:24 +0600
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 23:15 -0700
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:18 -0300
                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 16:40 -0700
                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 02:40 +0300
                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:09 +0300
                            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:12 +0300
                              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:13 +0300
                                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:14 +0300
                                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:16 +0300
                                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:18 +0300
                                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 04:23 +0300
                          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 19:03 -0700
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-06 11:57 +0000
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-05 11:01 +0100
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 15:14 -0300
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-06 01:06 +0100
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-09-06 18:10 +0000
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-06 20:27 +0200
                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 03:31 +0300
                        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:52 +0200
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-05 06:44 +0000
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:35 -0300
      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-03 15:48 -0700
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2026-09-04 02:02 +0300
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:46 +0600
      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-04 10:28 +0200
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2026-09-04 11:44 +0000
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-04 13:44 +0100
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 06:55 +0600
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 20:28 +0300
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-07 21:45 +0300
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-07 21:28 +0200
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:38 +0300
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:54 +0200
    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-04 22:58 +0000
      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 07:13 +0600
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 07:57 +0000
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 14:48 -0300
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-05 12:13 -0600
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 15:18 -0300
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-05 12:25 -0600
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 16:22 -0300
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 00:11 +0000
        Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-05 09:17 +0100
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-05 11:22 +0000
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-05 15:13 -0300
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 07:55 +0000
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 07:50 +0300
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 07:10 +0000
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 09:58 +0200
                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 21:00 +0400
                      Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 21:26 +0000
          Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-06 20:39 +0200
            Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 08:07 +0300
              Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 10:04 +0200
                Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2026-09-08 13:03 +0200
                  Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-08 13:38 +0200
                    Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-09-08 22:30 +0400

Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →

#155679

Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
[...]

> Hm, yes? If the identifier is constant and is tied to a location you're
> in frequently, like where you live, it can be used to track that.

  As others have mentioned, this all has been 'discussed' umpteen times
Sofar, this thread is not bringing any new information, viewpoints,
<whatever>.

  A summary of the previous times:

  At best, a home router's BSSID is tied to a *household*, *not* to a
*person*, which is 'Arlen''s 'privacy concern'.

  'Arlen' has a wife. What is the BSSID's location 'tracking'? 'Arlen'?
His wife? His dog?

  Case in point: I'm sometimes 18000km away from the location of my
router. Quite a bit of a (location) tracking error, don't you think?

  My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.

[...]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155681

On 2026-09-06 20:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
> 
>> Hm, yes? If the identifier is constant and is tied to a location you're
>> in frequently, like where you live, it can be used to track that.
> 
>    As others have mentioned, this all has been 'discussed' umpteen times
> Sofar, this thread is not bringing any new information, viewpoints,
> <whatever>.
> 
>    A summary of the previous times:
> 
>    At best, a home router's BSSID is tied to a *household*, *not* to a
> *person*, which is 'Arlen''s 'privacy concern'.
> 
>    'Arlen' has a wife. What is the BSSID's location 'tracking'? 'Arlen'?
> His wife? His dog?
> 
>    Case in point: I'm sometimes 18000km away from the location of my
> router. Quite a bit of a (location) tracking error, don't you think?
> 
>    My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
> seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.
> 
> [...]

The new information, in not a clear form, is that Arlen got Apple to do 
"something". What, is not clear, but I guess they simple removed his 
router from the list, so that he stops complaining to his neighbour (the 
one that works for Apple or has high contacts at Apple).

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155692

Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>    My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
>> seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.
>> 
>> [...]
> 
> The new information, in not a clear form...

Hi Carlos,

<exasperated-sarcasm> because of the ignorance exhibited by some posters... 

Let's ignore, for the moment, how *desperate* Franklin Slootweg is to troll
 Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.mobile.android,alt.comp.microsoft.windows
 Subject: This is another request to ask Frank Slootweg to stop trolling this ng
 Message-ID: <117kuh5$kt1$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Clearly, Franklin hasn't read the papers, nor the cites, nor even any of
the posts in this thread, since everything he said is dead wrong... 

Franklin didn't read a single word that was said in this entire thread.
Not one word.

So, of course, Franklin Slootweg has no idea whatsoever of the topic here.

But you are correct that the *new* information, is super secret & so well
diabolically hidden from those like Franklin that they'll never find it.

You must congratulate us on how diabolically clever we were in hiding it.
Franklin Slootweg, being a troll, will _never_ find out what's new, Carlos.

But you can, can't you.
 HINT: *Simply L@@K at the SUBJECT of this thread for the hidden answer...*

Isn't it amazing how well we hid from Frank what's new in the SUBJECT line! 

</exasperated-sarcasm> due to the ungodly ignorance being exhibited here... 
-- 
Some can't ever contribute to a topic but they feel they must still troll.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155709

On 2026-09-07 02:31, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>     My advice/request: Let it rest. The rest of us would appreciate not
>>> seeing the same non-arguments over and over again.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> The new information, in not a clear form...
> 
> Hi Carlos,
> 
> <exasperated-sarcasm> because of the ignorance exhibited by some posters...
> 
> Let's ignore, for the moment, how *desperate* Franklin Slootweg is to troll

That is OT and not in evidence.
I only see a single post of him in this thread, in the Android group. I 
don't see why you can be that angry at him.

...

> But you can, can't you.
>   HINT: *Simply L@@K at the SUBJECT of this thread for the hidden answer...*

It is good Usenet manners to explain the SUBJECT in the body.

> 
> Isn't it amazing how well we hid from Frank what's new in the SUBJECT line!
> 
> </exasperated-sarcasm> due to the ungodly ignorance being exhibited here...


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155636

On Sat, 5 Sep 2026 06:15:55 +0600, Maria Sophia wrote:

> Do you know the difference between these two situations:
>   a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?
>   b. Android owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?

If there is any difference, it would not be wise to rely on it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155653

Lawrence D㏕liveiro wrote:
>> Do you know the difference between these two situations:
>>   a. iPhone owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?
>>   b. Android owner happens to walk by my house & it uploads my BSSID/GPS?
> 
> If there is any difference, it would not be wise to rely on it.

There is a *huge* difference, Lawrence.

For half of that huge difference, all you need to do is read this paper.
 *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>

For the other half of that huge difference, all you need to read is this.
 <https://ichnaea.readthedocs.io/en/stable/api/geosubmit2.html>
    "The BSSID of the Wifi network. Hidden Wifi networks
     must not be collected."

Then, read how much Apple "cares about your privacy" by reading this!
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>

For contrast, read this:
 <https://wiki.mozilla.org/CloudServices/Location/FAQ>
 <https://wiki.mozilla.org/WIFI>

HINT: 
Mozilla/MLS would not collect data from Wi-Fi networks with hidden SSIDs.
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1177952>

Daniel Veditz confirmed that Mozilla MLS, like Google WPS, does not even
*collect* the BSSID/GPS pair for hidden-broadcast SSIDs. 

Notice the difference between 'collect', 'save on device" and 'upload' to
servers, because collecting means it can't be uploaded and hence not saved
into a global database for everyone in the world to easily track the router
movements from anywhere in the world to anywhere else in the world, in
almost real time with meter-like accuracy with no restrictions at all.

Most people don't understand a word I'm saying above, so I need to be clear
that "collecting" is different from "uploading" which itself is different
from "saving" which itself is different from "allowing anyone in the entire
world to access the unique BSSID/SSID pair" sans restrictions.

If you think through the fate of the two situations I keep presenting to
you, you'll see where they diverge in such a way as to be shockingly scary.

With the Python scripts we worked on in December of last year, even I can
track any router's movements in the world, with zero restrictions.

Want to test it?
Give me your router AP BSSID in your own home.

I'll tell you where you live.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155607

Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.

Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in sight of it,
yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock cameras everywhere
recording them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155608

Paul Rubi:

> Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in
> sight of it, yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock
> cameras everywhere recording them.

Because machine data acquirement is more powerful.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155632

Anton Shepelev wrote:
>> Your car broadcasts its license plate number to anyone in
>> sight of it, yet people are rightfully ticked off at Flock
>> cameras everywhere recording them.
> 
> Because machine data acquirement is more powerful.

The flock camera analogy only works if anyone in the world can access it.
 *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>

While I understand the analogies being presented, and certainly I
understand the purpose is to claim "no big deal" as a result, I must beg to
differ because the analogies, while reasonable, fall flat on some regards.

What if, for example, the government allowed you to put a black cloth over
your license plate, and that is a clear indication that you don't want it
to be recorded by Flock cameras (& by extension, your movements recorded).

What if Google cameras respected that black cloth as did Mozilla cameras.
But what if Apple cameras refused to respect that common leave-me-alone
black cloth?

Think about that.
What if *only* Apple cameras lifted up that black cloth, on purpose.
So that they could get your unique vehicle VIN that tracks you everywhere.

Pretty bad, huh?
But wait... it gets worse.

What if the Google camera, if it happens to get your license plate, which
is tied to your unique VIN, but the Google camera sees *another* indicator
that you do not want them to put that license plate into their database.

Let's say that's a sticker, on the plate, that says, oh, let's say _nomap.

What does Apple do? 
Versus what Google and Mozilla do?

But wait, if that's not bad enough, there's still more. A lot more in fact.

What if anyone in the world could look up that license plate & related VIN
from anywhere in the world, and there are absolutely no controls on that?

What?

Do you see the difference?

Allow me to provide an example:
 a. Let's say my ex-wife is in Germany, back in the home country
 b. But, she wants to track my vehicle everywhere I go
 c. As described in the aforementioned research paper, she can.

It's no different than you choosing the license plate of your ex-wife (or
whomever) and tracking them anywhere in the world, with no controls on
that.

Do you see why understanding the problem set makes the flock camera issue
only superficially an analogy. 

The flock camera could only be an analogy if anyone in the world could
track your movements down to a meter resolution, with no controls on that.
-- 
What people need to know about privacy is complex, so they simplify it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155613

On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote:
> 
>> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access
>> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave
>> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of
>> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own
>> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database.
> 
> I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.

I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is 
documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their 
maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.

> 
> And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing
> in security or privacy. Don’t do it.

Yep.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155616

On 2026-09-04, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote:
>>> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access
>>> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave
>>> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of
>>> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own
>>> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database.
>> 
>> I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
>> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
>> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.
>
> I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is 
> documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their 
> maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.

I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden,
which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end
of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless.
It seems highly implausible.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155618

On 2026-09-04, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> On 2026-09-04, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-09-03 10:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote:
>>>> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access
>>>> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave
>>>> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of
>>>> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own
>>>> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database.
>>> 
>>> I don’t understand what you’re complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
>>> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
>>> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.
>>
>> I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is 
>> documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their 
>> maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.
>
> I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden,
> which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end
> of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless.
> It seems highly implausible.

Perhaps unless an Apple device was used to connect to it?

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155627

Nuno Silva wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 16:30:15 +0930, Maria Sophia wrote:
>>>>> Those scripts proved I could collect a list of every single access
>>>>> point in Apple's database, just as researchers Eric Rye and Dave
>>>>> Levin did, using a simple perl script which proved the results of
>>>>> their paper, and which went further to prove that my own
>>>>> hidden-broadcast SSIDs were in that database.
>>>> 
>>>> I don┤ understand what you┴e complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
>>>> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
>>>> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.
>>>
>>> I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is 
>>> documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their 
>>> maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.
>>
>> I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden,
>> which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end
>> of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless.
>> It seems highly implausible.
> 
> Perhaps unless an Apple device was used to connect to it?

This part of the discussion contains 3 very well thought out reflections.
 1. Carlos
 2. John Ribbens
 3. Nuno Silva

Months ago, we wrote a python script that essentially gathered the physical
location of every single unique access point BSSID in the world (see sig).
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/madinas/95kLx8eQdy4BzyZ8RoP0zoVLQ2k/>

All we did was exactly reproduce the results from Levin & Rye in this paper
 *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>
 <https://studylib.net/doc/28159272/surveilling-the-masses-with-wi-fi-based-positioning-systems>

There were "posters" who disputed this, particularly on the Apple ngs, 
but it was clear they were denying only to defend the honor of their God.

They didn't understand a single thing, which is telling when someone denies
research papers that no professional would deny, yet Apple posters deny it.

We were able to effectively pick any area of the world that has had an
Apple mobile device swing by at some point in time and then we could locate
every single BSSID/GPS location in that area, to identify, for
non-apartment-style areas the home address, and then, if that router was
moved to a new location, instantly, we could locate where they moved it to.

This is in keeping with what the paper claimed, and for Apple posters to
deny it (which they did), is not only absurd, but telling in how desperate
Apple posters tend to be when it comes to defending their religious God.

To remove doubt, Carlos is correct in his statement above, that every
access point I discussed with Apple Maps executives ended with "_nomap".

Therefore, they are not "supposed" to be in the Apple world wide WPS db.
And yet, they were.

None of the Apple documentation at that time said that they would be.

Only because of me (and I know this from my emails with Apple), is the cite
which I provided saying that even with _nomap, you're still in their db.

Which means, if I didn't have Apple remove it manually (which they did at
my insistence), then anyone could instantly track me down to the meter.
were I to move my router to another location in the world (by my BSSID).

Apple knows this.
They're not stupid.

They're liars.
But they're not stupid.

Notice that what Jon Ribbens said is also true, and more telling than what
Carlos had mentioned, although both are perfectly accurate assessments.
 a. The SSID has _nomap
 b. The SSID broadcast is hidden
 c. Google refuses to put that in their public WPS database
 d. Better yet, Google has protections on their public WPS database
 e. SO does Mozilla (although their database has been deprecated)
 f. So does everyone... 
 g. Except Apple

Worse, Eric Rye and Dave Levin proved that once the unique BSSID is in the
Apple WPS database, anyone in the entire world can track that router, down
to the meter, no matter where it is subsequently moved to (and no matter
what any subsequent SSID may be), which I also proved in my scripting.

Given Apple posters will stop at nothing to defend their religious God, we
wasted umpteen posts proving that, but not one of them ever ran the code.

I did.
I simply ran the same python code that was described in the research.
And got the same results (I stopped at a fefw hundred thousand, while they
went on to gather billions, or at least hundreds of millions, as I recall).

Proof of concept is all I needed to affirm that if I happen to know the
BSSID of someone's router (oh, say, an ex wife or a disgruntled employer), 
I could track that router anywhere in the world, easily, down to the meter.

As for what Nuno Silva said, all we need to do to get our unique BSSID and
GPS location into the Apple WPS database, is for an Apple mobile device to
be within hearing distance, for only a moment or so, whether or not we have
told Apple by the SSID postfix of _nomap, if the broadcast is set to null.

Those who actually understood what I wrote above, which is likely only
about one one-hundredth of the people reading this (simply because they
have bias that they can't shake), will understand the catch-22 involved.

For data collection... 
 A. Google/Mozilla do privacy one way (i.e, the well-known correct way)
 B. Apple does it completely differently.

Worse (far worse), for data distribution... 
 A. Google/Mozilla do privacy one way (i.e, with judicious controls)
 B. Apple does it completely differently (i.e., no controls at all!)

Think about that.
-- 
Privacy is a million things, of which most people only understand about 3.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155718

Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> I don┤ understand what you┴e complaining about, exactly. Your wi-fi
>>> network broadcasts its existence to all and sundry, and yet you feel
>>> upset when somebody collects that information and passes it on.
>>
>> I guess it is because the SSID is terminated in _nomap, which is 
>> documented as a flag to Apple and others to not store this SSID in their 
>> maps. But Apple is/was mapping them all the same.
> 
> I got the impression they were claiming that their SSID was hidden,
> which makes it irrelevant as to whether it has "_nomap" at the end
> of it, but that Apple had somehow discovered and logged it nonetheless.
> It seems highly implausible.

Hi Jon,

I appreciate your intelligence as you got everything right tactically.
You even got the fact of how shocking the truth is, correct!

You said what Apple is doing is, to you, "highly implausible".
I would agree, had I not been horrified to find out Apple is doing it!

The fact Apple is doing it shocked me, which is what started this quest.
At that time, Apple said nothing about whether they're doing it.

But I have letters from Apple lawyers saying they will document it.
And they did.

So... 

It's not only not "highly implausible", but Apple now *says* they do it!
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>

That documentation, which I have in my email records dated months before it
was documented, from Apple lawyers, saying that they'd document it, makes
it pretty plausible after all.

The fact Apple documents it, when they didn't document it when I first
brought this to their attention (and to that of the newsgrops), is pretty
good evidence that it's not only NOT "highly implausible" but shockingly
true.

The fact it's true is the shocking part.
Is it not?
-- 
The great thing about Usenet is people work together to help all learn.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155727

Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing
>> in security or privacy. Don�t do it.
> 
> Yep.

There are two fundamental issues which are making this task more difficult:
 1. The common trolls are *desperate* to infest this thread
    (and yet, not a single one of the trolls can possibly add value), 
 2. And, people who are NOT trolls, like Carlos above, still do not
    (yet) understand the topic because they're applying old knowledge.

Anyone who thinks he'll understand this topic who only knows the stone-age
networking basics (which we all know) will *never* understand this topic.

Anyone who says "yep" to that statement, fundamentally doesn't understand 
that hiding the broadcast works for every outfit on the planet we know of.

Except Apple.

When I write a thread, it's about something important most people 
can't even fathom, so it takes intelligence to understand the topic.

None of the common trolls, Hank or Franlin or Wolfan, et al. has the 
intelligence to even begin to understand this topic. 

Yet, these trolls, like Nuno Silva, feel *desperate* to say "something", 
(anything!) because they simply cannot comprehend the topic at hand.

However, some people are intelligent, who, unlike Nuno or Winston or 
Franklin or Hank, et al., have the intelligence to comprehend the topic.

Only the people who possess the minimum intelligence, can add value here.
Not the common trolls like Winston, Slootweg, Nuno Silva, Wolfan, et al.

Carlos, to his credit, is *trying* to bring his level of knowledge out of 
the stone age of networking, which, let's be clear, we all start with that.

But this topic is not from the stone age of networking.
This topic is new.

If people can't follow the trail of the BSSID from the home router to the 
mass surveillance team somewhere in Russia (or at R122 at Fort Mead), then 
they have not understood how *different* things are in the modern day.

Three fundamental modern facts need to be understood before someone, like 
Carlos did above, simply claims "yep" to something completely incorrect.

1. Apple iOS devices see & collect & store & upload BSSID/GPS pairs
   *COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY* than do Google Android devices.

   If you don't know that difference, you know nothing about this topic.
   You're in the stone age of knowledge.

   That isn't bad. It just means you have to seek to understand before
   you say "yep" to obviously incorrect assessments of the situation.

2. Apple stores, vets, culls, and distributes its internal WPS cloud db
   *COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY* than does Google/Mozilla (and others).

   If you don't know that difference, you know nothing about this topic.
   You're in the stone age of knowledge.

   That isn't bad. It just means you have to seek to understand before
   you say "yep" to obviously incorrect assessments of the situation.

If anyone is stuck in the stone age of knowledge level, that's fine, as 
there's nothing wrong with the stone-age knowledge that, oh, say, 
Winston spewed.

But spewing stone-age knowledge does not help when we all know the 
stone-age knowledge of networking.

What would help is if people understood the path of the BSSID/GPS pair.
-- 
When I write a thread, it's about something important most people 
can't even fathom, so it takes intelligence to understand the topic.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155729

On 2026-09-07 20:45, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> And hiding SSIDs is a complete waste of time, which gains you nothing
>>> in security or privacy. Don�t do it.
>>
>> Yep.
> 
> There are two fundamental issues which are making this task more difficult:
>   1. The common trolls are *desperate* to infest this thread
>      (and yet, not a single one of the trolls can possibly add value),
>   2. And, people who are NOT trolls, like Carlos above, still do not
>      (yet) understand the topic because they're applying old knowledge.
...

The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about 
Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad 
behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making 
your AP hidden in the first place.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155742

Carlos E.R. wrote:
> The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about 
> Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad 
> behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making 
> your AP hidden in the first place.

Hi Carlos,

I disagree.

The answer to *this* question, will tell you why what you said is wrong:

Q: Will Google's WPS database contain a BSSID:GPS pair for an access point
   whose SSID broadcast is set to hidden (i.e., empty or null)?
A: Please answer "yes", or "no".

I know the answer to that question.
You clearly do not.

Once you know the answer to that question, you'll see why what you said, 
is dead wrong.

I could ask the same question of the Mozilla MLS, but it's now defunct, 
but they document this (and we published that documentation elsewhere).

Only Apple ignores the clear privacy intent of setting a hidden SSID.
Nobody else.

Just Apple. (to our knowledge)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155754

On 2026-09-08 06:38, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> The point we are saying is not what you claim it to be. It is not about
>> Apple storing and publishing BSSIDs of hidden SSIDs. This is bad
>> behaviour by them. Ok. But our point is that you gain nothing by making
>> your AP hidden in the first place.
> 
> Hi Carlos,
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> The answer to *this* question, will tell you why what you said is wrong:
> 
> Q: Will Google's WPS database contain a BSSID:GPS pair for an access point
>     whose SSID broadcast is set to hidden (i.e., empty or null)?
> A: Please answer "yes", or "no".
> 
> I know the answer to that question.
> You clearly do not.

I do, as a matter of fact.

> 
> Once you know the answer to that question, you'll see why what you said,
> is dead wrong.
> 
> I could ask the same question of the Mozilla MLS, but it's now defunct,
> but they document this (and we published that documentation elsewhere).
> 
> Only Apple ignores the clear privacy intent of setting a hidden SSID.
> Nobody else.
> 
> Just Apple. (to our knowledge)


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155624

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
> This is an update to the WPS scripts that I posted a few months ago.

I was wondering how you got on with your "experiment" only the other day. 

You said you had installed two routers in friends' houses downtown, move
them around and then track the movement in the database. 

I'd like to see the results. How often did you move them, how far, and were
the details tracked in the "apple database"?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155630

Chris wrote:
> Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
>> This is an update to the WPS scripts that I posted a few months ago.
> 
> I was wondering how you got on with your "experiment" only the other day. 
> 
> You said you had installed two routers in friends' houses downtown, move
> them around and then track the movement in the database. 
> 
> I'd like to see the results. How often did you move them, how far, and were
> the details tracked in the "apple database"?

Hi Chris,

Thanks for remembering that I ran a 3-router experiment early in the year.

That experiment was run in the first month of the year, which was before
Apple changed their documentation saying that they will track us forever.
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>

Those BSSIDs are now in Apple's WPS database, so the experiment worked.
Now, anywhere in the world I move those routers, anyone can track them.

Instantly.
Down to a meter or so resolution.
With no controls whatsoever.

Think about that.
What if I were hiding from an ex-wife or disgruntled Apple poster?

Anyone on the planet can track my router location from anywhere in the
world down to meter-like accuracy, and I simply cannot stop them.

The only thing I can do, once my BSSID is in Apple's WPS database, is throw
that router over the next bridge because I can't change the BSSID on it.

I can be tracked forever, if my location is associated with that router.

Just like the research paper said it would be.
I simply reproduced exactly what the research paper said was possible.

Worse, I proved hiding the BSSID broadcast was a catch-22 situation. 
 a. It kept the BSSID out of Google/Mozilla hands (they're well behaved)
 b. Yet, it's permanently in the Apple WPS database

Which do you pick to be in, given you can't solve both issues at once?

HINT: Apple's WPS database has no protection whatsoever, as proved by:
 *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>

My research *started* with that paper, and took it to the next level.
-- 
Of the million things to know about privacy, most people only know 3.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web