EFF Tracking Changes To Major Company Terms Of Service

from the watch-what-you-change... dept

The EFF has launched a neat little project, called TOSback, where it tracks any changes to online service agreements from a bunch of different well known companies, such as Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook and eBay. Considering that some of these companies have been known to quietly change their terms without making the details all that public, it seems like this could be quite a useful service -- at least in getting these companies to recognize that they should clearly explain why they're changing their terms and what those changes really mean.

4 Comments | Leave a Comment..

The Real Impact Of Google's Latitude: Getting People Comfortable With Location Sharing

from the What's-Your-10-20 dept

There's been a lot of coverage around about Google's new friend finder, built into its Maps app for smartphones. The feature, called Latitude, is able to share your location with friends that you select, and who also carry a compatible mobile device (or laptop) with the app installed and a data connection to Google's servers. This kind of service has lots of uses for the enterprise, families, and among friends, and it seems like Google has added the necessary controls to avoid the worst of the privacy issues. But the privacy issue has been discussed elsewhere, and frankly it's hardly worth debating since usage is optional. Yes, you sacrifice privacy to use such a service, but YOU choose can when it's useful enough to be worth the privacy sacrifice, and turn it off at other times. Seems simple. I make the same trade-off with my toll-paying RFID tag.

So let's discuss the competitive implications of this latest move, instead. Other firms, such as Loopt, Networks in Motion, Wavemarket, OmniTRAKS, FindWhere, Motorola Rhino, Autodesk have been offering various location tracking services for years, with the first in the US consumer phone services popping up around 2005. Historically, the services were offered for prices of $10/mo or more. Loopt offers their consumer service through carriers for free or $4/mo, but Latitude is user-installed and free. Now, it's no surprise that consumer-grade tracking services are offered for free: consumers tend to like that price, and the providers can make revenue by driving consumers to local business through advertising. But the free Google application also threatens enterprise-grade tracking solutions, especially in an era of cost-cutting. Like enterprise-grade solutions, Google can display a map with the location of all the tracked "friends" or staff on a PC as well as a phone. Zoinks! Looks like the bottom just fell out of the low end of the enterprise tracking market.

So, how do enterprise vendors "compete with free"? Well, so far, Latitude cannot replace an elaborate employee tracking solution that records breadcrumbs, integrates time-carding, optimal dispatch routing, offers geo-fencing, and other high-end functions. The existing enterprise vendors can compete quite well by offering premium features, integration into management tools, and verticalized solutions that deliver incremental value over the free services. How do you compete with a free product? Offer a product that's worth more -- and which the free version can't easily copy.

Google's entry signals a tipping point for tracking, as its brand penetration and price will push this type of service into many more handsets. Since Latitude also works on laptops, we can expect much better targeted location-aware advertising on our laptop Google searches, too... whether that impresses you or creeps you out. Bottom line is that the Twitter-types, who constantly update their network with short text messages, can save themselves some typing with Latitude. Privacy advocates will shun it, and others like me will manage it, enabling Latitude when we need it, and shutting it off most of the day. However, in the long run, this can be quite good for competitors in the market who can successfully incorporate advanced features worth paying for. Let Google educate the market, and have demand for such apps in the enterprise level bubble up.

Derek Kerton is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Derek Kerton and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

19 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Is There A Privacy Issue In Cable Companies' Plan To Track Viewing Habits?

from the depends-on-how-you-look-at-it dept

Ryan Radia takes a look at the news that cable TV providers are teaming up to track viewing habits and questions whether or not there's a real privacy issue there. He comes to the conclusion that there isn't one for a few reasons. First, he notes that the data is anonymized and aggregated. That's true, but not very convincing. We've seen over and over again that there's no such thing as an anonymized dataset. There's almost always something in the data that can reveal at least some of the participants. Perhaps that's more difficult with things TV watching habits -- but not impossible. Next, he points out that the legal and PR impact of any real privacy violation would be pretty damaging on these companies. Finally, he suggests that the benefits of the tracking outweigh any negatives -- which, again is not very convincing. Just because a company can better target ads to you doesn't seem like an excuse to give up your privacy. That said, I do tend to agree that this isn't much of a privacy violation at all, but if the cable companies were smart, they should at least be extremely upfront about how the process works, and let people voluntarily "opt-in" to it, rather than being forced to join. Hell, they can offer incentives to do so. It's worked for AC Nielsen for years.

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

UK Releases Details, But Delays, Plan To Surveil Every Bit Of Communication

from the one-more-year-to-be-free-of-draconian-rules dept

We recently noted that some articles were appearing in the UK about a plan by the government to track all phone calls, emails and internet surfing histories in that country in a giant database. The whole thing sounded so extreme we even doubted it was true. However, it appears to be based in fact, as the government is outlining the details of the plan, while at the same time agreeing to delay introducing it for at least year, in order to hear from the public (or, perhaps, to hope that public dislike of this proposal dies down enough that it can be introduced quietly). The backers of the plan stress that all they want is the data about the communications, rather than the communications themselves. So, that would mean they're interested in who called whom, not what was said, and who emailed whom, not what was written. That may be small comfort to some, but it still seems like a huge privacy violation, and the database is almost certainly to be abused and misused by those who have access to it.

11 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Bad Ideas: Stealing Products That Can Be Tracked Wirelessly

from the just-a-suggestion dept

Slashdot points us to the amusing story of technology "solving" a theft of an irrigation controller on a farm, thanks to a wireless connection. The irrigation controller was stolen, which was first noticed when it sent an error message to the guy who runs them. A few weeks later, though, he was surprised to get a signal from the controller, and he was able to communicate with the device and get the company that supplied the wireless connection to triangulate and reveal the general location of the unit (the guy had the maker of the controller, who obviously contracts with the wireless provider, request this info to make sure the request was legit). From that, the guy used Google Earth to figure out where the controller must be -- and went to the local police. After investigating the person whose property it ended up on, the controller went missing again... only to turn back up in its original location a few weeks later.

While it's a neat story of technology thwarting a theft, there are a few questions raised by the story. To be honest, the full writeup so pumps up this particular brand of irrigation controller system, that it almost sounds like an apocryphal story made up to hype up how much better this controller is than competitors (look, it's theft proof!). Also, despite the "happy ending" -- the actual thieves were not apprehended, and future thieves will simply learn to disable the wireless communications ability. In the meantime, though, it's a reminder that technology is making the job of the ordinary thief somewhat more difficult these days.

15 Comments | Leave a Comment..

EFF, ACLU Sue To Find Out Details Of Gov't Use Of Mobile Phone Data To Track People

from the it's-like-your-own-personal-beacon dept

Back in November, the news broke on the Friday after Thanksgiving that the federal government routinely asked for and received information from mobile phone operators about the location of various mobile phones (effectively tracking their owners) without bothering to show any sort of probable cause. This should raise plenty of concern (especially combined with the warrantless wiretapping program), as it effectively would mean that if you own a mobile phone, you've given the gov't the freedom to figure out where you are at any moment in time with no probable cause.

The EFF and the ACLU filed Freedom of Information Act requests to find out details of the program, which were (not surprisingly) denied by the Justice Department. The two organizations have now sued the government to find out more about these programs. Given the government's reaction to similar lawsuits on wiretapping, don't expect much info to come out of this lawsuit -- and do expect a vigorous attempt to get the case dismissed with various bogus claims of "state secrets" and "national security." It all comes down to the same basic thing, though. The government seems to think it's above the law.

12 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Is It Fair Game To Track People's Movements Via Their Mobile Phones?

from the ethical-questions dept

For many years, there have been efforts under way to use data from mobile phones to determine where people are or how they travel. Often this is used with the idea of getting useful automobile traffic info (if mobile phones are moving slowly, so are their cars). However, this has resulted in some privacy concerns, with people wondering why their data is being used in this way. And stories about how the boss of a big Chinese telco regularly uses the data to spy on people's location probably don't make people any more comfortable.

However, some researchers worked with an unnamed mobile phone company to get a ton of this type of data in order to get an idea of how people move around. While the researchers seem to think the results are surprising, they don't seem all that unexpected. Basically, people tend to just go to a few regular places rather than travel randomly around -- and most people don't travel far from home all that often. I'm somewhat surprised that anyone would have expected otherwise.

What may be more interesting, though, is the brewing controversy over how this data was obtained and whether or not it violated privacy rights or ethics rules. The researchers note that the data was totally anonymized, but we've all seen how any anonymized dataset can be unanonymized with a little work. In some ways, this goes back to a post we had last year from Tom Lee, questioning whether we needed new privacy norms when it came to things like mobile phone tracking. What does seem likely, however, is that we're only going to hear of more and more cases where such tracking data is used, and such questions about privacy and morality probably won't hold much weight next to the desire to get and use that kind of data.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Digital Watermarks Are Not The Answer

from the the-next-rabbit-hole dept

It was quite predictable that as the recording industry finally realized that DRM was a bad idea that it would move on to digital watermarking. The idea sounds appealing. It doesn't have the feature that people hate about DRM: preventing you from doing what you want with the music you've purchased -- but it does have a number of other downsides. First, it tends to degrade the quality of the audio. Second, it's often relatively easy to remove the watermark, making it effectively useless. Third, if watermarks are used to link a specific file to a specific user (which the industry insists it isn't doing... yet), it suddenly becomes a huge liability just to have those music files. Imagine if you lose your iPod full of watermarked tracks, and all of those tracks find their way onto file sharing sites? Even more importantly, the whole concept of watermarking is counterproductive to what music files should be about. If the industry were smart and understood the basic economics of what was happening, they'd want people to be sharing music. They should want people to be their biggest (free!) promoters of music. They should want people to be spreading the music of their musicians as a way to get the word out. The whole concept of watermarking goes against that very idea. It's more backwards thinking from an industry that is more focused on protecting an old way of doing business, rather than recognizing the opportunities of a new way of doing business.

29 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Cell Phone Tracking, Privacy, And Learning Not To Look

from the peek-a-boo dept

Of all the Fridays for burying news, the one after Thanksgiving has got to be among the most effective. So it's a shame that the Washington Post broke the news then: law enforcement officials have been routinely asking for and receiving tracking data from cell phone companies without having to demonstrate probable cause. From the article:

Instead of seeking warrants based on probable cause, some federal prosecutors are applying for orders based on a standard lower than probable cause derived from two statutes: the Stored Communications Act and the Pen Register Statute, according to judges and industry lawyers.

In some ways this is unsurprising. As with the administration's avoidance of FISA courts as it mines data, this is an example of law enforcement identifying a new tool and attempting to use it without engaging existing oversight structures. Nobody likes doing paperwork, after all. But this particular issue is also emblematic of the reexamination of the public/private divide that our increasingly data-rich world is prompting.

It'd be a stretch to interpret the decision to buy a cellphone with non-optional E911 tracking capabilities as an agreement to publicly disclose your location to the world. But fuzzier cases are looming. Consider Yahoo's FireEagle initiative, which will provide an integrated platform for plotting your location and an API that'll allow approved third parties to observe it. To many it may seem incomprehensible that individuals would opt in to such tracking — how hard is it to enter your address at pizzahut.com, anyway? — but there's no doubt that these services are coming. Some mobile carriers like Boost and Helio already offer GPS friend-locator services, after all.

So if I decide to let a third party know my location — a cab company, for instance — does that mean that law enforcement can retrieve it from them without a warrant? What if I let my family know where I am? What if I post my movements to my Facebook feed but only allow my contacts to observe them? For that matter, what if a firm writes a program and observes that some of its company-issued cell phones are regularly being carried into Narcotics Anonymous meetings and distributes that information internally?

Doubtless all of these examples could be interpreted through existing law. That approach has worked well enough so far: treating an email as a letter works fine, and an IM conversation can be roughly thought of as a phone call. But new types of semi-private communication will pose a challenge to this approach, as will the sheer volume and accessibility of the data that can be gathered about an individual.

It seems clear that individuals are increasingly publishing information about themselves that, while obtainable, should only be formally considered in certain cases — if, that is, we're going to maintain any semblance of privacy. It will be interesting to see where these lines are drawn. Cell phone tracking data is being used to put people in jail, which makes it a good candidate for prompting new laws and judicial decisions. But it seems likely that as we record more and more of our private lives online we'll not only need new privacy laws, but new privacy norms as well.

Tom Lee is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Tom Lee and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

23 Comments | Leave a Comment..

OnStar To Warn, Then Stop, Stolen Cars

from the wait-until-someone-hacks-the-system dept

GM continues to expand the features of its popular OnStar system with a new service that's been talked about for years, that would allow the company to automatically stop a stolen car remotely. The last time we spoke about such a concept, it was four years ago -- and there were a lot of people worried about the idea. However, that may have been because it was the police asking for the right to stop cars remotely, rather than an individual using a private service (and they were also interested in using it to control speeders). In this case, the service would first alert the car thief that it's known they're driving a stolen car (and potentially that the police are on their way), and that OnStar is about to stop the automobile. It would then slowly halt the car -- though the driver could stop the car themselves at any time. The police apparently are excited about the possibility of this ending some high speed chases (and certainly making it easier to retrieve the car), but you have to wonder what happens if the service is hacked or malfunctioned.

23 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Company Betting On GPS-Based Driving Tax

from the we-know-where-you've-been-driving dept

Back in 2003, the state of Oregon considered a driving tax, which would involve putting GPS devices on cars so the government could see how far you drove, and then tax you for it. The idea being that those who drive more should pay a larger portion of taxes to support the roads they drive on. Of course, for many, many people, the idea of the government keeping tabs on where you drive and how far you go seems rather Big Brotherish -- and those people note that you can accomplish pretty much the same thing (making heavy drivers pay more taxes) simply by taxing gasoline. Soon afterwards, the head of California's DMV suggested that a similar taxing and tracking plan made sense. Over in the UK, they've looked at similar proposals as well. It certainly seems a bit early to bet on such a concept as the next big thing, but that apparently hasn't stopped one company from building a device for exactly this purpose and showing it off at a recent conference. The company is smart in positioning it less as a device for tracking drivers and more as a way of "creating toll roads out of every road." The News.com article then goes on to rail against the very idea of toll roads -- but perhaps that's because they're quite rare here in northern California. In other parts of the country, they're a lot more common. Rather than worrying about the toll road aspect, it seems like the idea of government agencies having immediate access to information about where you drove at what time is a lot more troublesome.

65 Comments | Leave a Comment..