[HN Gopher] Surveilling the masses with wi-fi-based positioning ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Surveilling the masses with wi-fi-based positioning systems
        
       Author : belter
       Score  : 412 points
       Date   : 2024-05-27 16:25 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | spr-alex wrote:
       | I work at Supernetworks where we're building secure by default
       | Wi-Fi routers. Our software had the ability to assign MACs to
       | interfaces for a little while now, and as a response to this
       | study we've now also added MAC randomization, now in the dev
       | branch, and generally available in our next release
       | (https://github.com/spr-networks/super). Many cards which support
       | WDS//AP-VLAN have no trouble with updating the BSSID.
       | 
       | For use as a travel router the UI makes it simple to randomize
       | both the AP BSSID/MAC as well as interfaces working as WiFi
       | client stations for internet uplink.
        
         | canadiantim wrote:
         | So is bringing your own travel router while traveling the
         | current best practice for securely connecting to public wifi's?
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40494994
           | SSIDName_optout_nomap
        
             | sambazi wrote:
             | pretty please don't fall for that crap
        
               | canadiantim wrote:
               | What's wrong about it?
        
         | staplers wrote:
         | If you had a nice enclosure for these routers you could take a
         | large share of the prosumer market and be a "privacy" version
         | of unifi.
         | 
         | As an average home user, I would love something like this
         | (interface and features) but with a nicer looking hardware
         | (wife tax).
        
           | spr-alex wrote:
           | Yes, We have some prototypes and will have some nice
           | enclosures coming soon that we'll make available via our
           | website at https://www.supernetworks.org
        
           | mrbluecoat wrote:
           | In addition, some parental controls would be nice (feature
           | parity with, say, Gryphon). I see your subscription tier
           | offers some of that (schedules and domain logging).
        
         | throw0101d wrote:
         | > _Our software had the ability to assign MACs to interfaces
         | for a little while now, and as a response to this study we 've
         | now also added MAC randomization, now in the dev branch_ [...]
         | 
         | Will it follow what the IEEE is proposing?
         | 
         | * 802.11bh: Enhanced service with randomized MAC addresses
         | 
         | * 802.11bi: Enhanced service with Data Privacy Protection
         | 
         | * https://standards.ieee.org/beyond-standards/data-privacy-
         | and...
        
           | spr-alex wrote:
           | These amendments might not apply to BSSIDs/Access Points but
           | refer to enhanced privacy features to stop the fingerprinting
           | of stations as well as providing ways for APs to identify
           | stations under randomization, across a complicated network.
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | Note the privacy-impaired 802.11bf: WLAN Sensing,
           | https://www.ieee802.org/11/Reports/tgbf_update.htm &
           | https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/02/27/1088154/wifi-
           | sen...
           | 
           |  _> Someone outside your home could potentially tell when
           | it's vacant, or see what you are doing inside. Consider all
           | the reasons someone might want to secretly track someone
           | else's movements. Wi-Fi sensing has the potential to make
           | many of those uses possible.. it could be used by
           | corporations to monitor consumers, workers, and union
           | organizers; by stalkers or domestic abusers to harass their
           | victims; and by other nefarious actors to commit a variety of
           | crimes. The fact that people cannot currently tell they are
           | being monitored adds to the risk. "We need both legal and
           | technical guardrails "..
           | 
           | > At least 30 million homes already have some kind of Wi-Fi
           | sensing available.. When the new standard comes out in 2025,
           | it will allow "every Wi-Fi device to easily and reliably
           | extract the signal measurements".. With Wi-Fi 7.., "the
           | sensing capability can improve by one order of magnitude"..
           | The committee did discuss privacy and security.. But they
           | decided that while those concerns do need to be addressed,
           | they are not within the committee's mandate.. Wi-Fi sensing
           | is more concerning than cameras, because it can be completely
           | invisible._
           | 
           | IEEE standards are a minimum starting point for
           | interoperability. Security and privacy improvements can be
           | implemented in open-source code, to inform future revisions
           | of IEEE standards.
        
             | throw0101d wrote:
             | Privacy has been discussed with .11bf; see "SSV.D Security
             | and Privacy" of the following:
             | 
             | * https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.04859
             | 
             | Of course Wifi sensing is already a thing with existing
             | signals:
             | 
             | * https://web.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/WiFiReadingThroughWall
             | 
             | * https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/scientists-
             | tra...
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | _> Privacy has been discussed_
               | 
               | Discussion is a good start. That section of the paper
               | states:                 Although there are already
               | various ways to improve security and privacy, IEEE
               | 802.11bf is still discussing which solution to add.
               | 
               | Hopefully the scheduled 2025 launch of 802.11bf will be
               | gated upon _implementation_ of security and privacy.
               | 
               |  _> Of course Wifi sensing is already a thing with
               | existing signals_
               | 
               | Several orders of magnitude exist between researchers and
               | commercial devices in the hands of millions of consumers.
        
               | judge2020 wrote:
               | > Several orders of magnitude exist between researchers
               | and commercial devices in the hands of millions of
               | consumers.
               | 
               | Well, between nation state actors and consumers
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | fight_club.jpg
        
         | transpute wrote:
         | _> we 're building secure by default Wi-Fi routers_
         | 
         | In addition to RPi hardware, it would be helpful to support
         | Rockchip RK3399 and RK3588 SoCs that have minimal binary blobs,
         | since these can used with open-source Arm Trusted Firmware
         | (TF-A) for secure boot, to ensure that only owner-authorized OS
         | and firmware are running on the device.
         | 
         |  _> Many cards which support WDS //AP-VLAN have no trouble with
         | updating the BSSID._
         | 
         | Do these M.2 WiFi cards support AP/VLAN and BSSID updates?
         | Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 Wi-Fi 5       Qualcomm Atheros
         | QCNFA765 Wi-Fi 6
        
           | karma_pharmer wrote:
           | _Rockchip RK3399 and RK3588 SoCs_
           | 
           | Just so people don't get confused, there is a huge world of
           | difference between these two chips. They are not in the same
           | category.
           | 
           | Rockchip RK3399 is 100% blobless. You even control the EL3
           | Trustzone Secure World! This is True Root.
           | 
           | Rockchip RK3588 _still_ needs blobs in EL3, the highest
           | privilege level. We 've been hearing rumors for years now
           | about "oh they'll open source it next month for sure" and
           | it.... just. never. happens. Please stop spreading this
           | rumor. Source or GTFO, Rockchip.
        
             | transpute wrote:
             | Feb 2024, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39490540 &
             | https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-
             | firmware-a...
             | 
             |  _> Rockchip have sent a few patches to the TF-A project
             | here to support [RK3588].. From TF-A we can now build a
             | complete working BL31 and replace the closed binary blob
             | with an open-source binary that we can compile ourselves..
             | There are still some missing parts and the most important
             | that is remaining right now is the DDR training blob, which
             | is still closed source._
        
               | karma_pharmer wrote:
               | Like I said: blobs in EL3, the highest privilege level.
               | 
               | We've been getting these "almost there" announcements
               | quarterly for multiple years at this point.
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | In decreasing order of preference:                 OSS
               | TF-A at EL3 + OSS DDR training (RK3399)       OSS TF-A at
               | EL3 + closed DDR training (RK3588)       OSS uboot +
               | closed TF-A        closed uboot + closed TF-A
               | 
               | Those who need the features of RK3588 can compare it to
               | competitors which are less open.
               | 
               | Those who don't need the features of RK3588 can use the
               | older and fully open RK3399.
        
               | karma_pharmer wrote:
               | > OSS TF-A at EL3 + closed DDR training (RK3588)
               | 
               | That should be "blob which does stuff, including DDR
               | training, _at EL3_ ".
               | 
               | That blob certainly does DDR training. Maybe it does
               | other stuff. But all of it is done at EL3.
               | 
               | > In decreasing order of preference
               | 
               | "Warning! Diagram is not drawn to scale."
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | _> That blob certainly does DDR training. Maybe it does
               | other stuff. But all of it is done at EL3._
               | 
               | If someone wants to find out, they can load it in
               | IDA/Ghidra?
        
               | karma_pharmer wrote:
               | If it was that easy we'd have a cleanroom FOSS
               | implementation by now. It's been more than two years!
               | 
               | https://wiki.raptorcs.com/wiki/Project_Ortega
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | Cleanroom reverse engineering for the purpose of
               | publishing new driver code, to avoid legal/IP minefields,
               | is super-expensive. It should be a much narrower scope to
               | determine whether a binary blob's actions are limited to
               | memory training, since there is no requirement to publish
               | reusable source code.
               | 
               | Looks like Collabora is already monitoring the blob, so
               | it's not entirely a mystery:                 At the
               | moment of writing this article, we have identified a few
               | differences from the binary blob previously used, which
               | we can highlight as following:            Binary BL31
               | contains some unknown code to get HDMI-RX PHY access
               | working.       The cpufreq support in binary BL31 is
               | different from TF-A.             There could be more
               | issues that are unknown at the moment and users should be
               | aware of it.
        
               | karma_pharmer wrote:
               | > Cleanroom reverse engineering for the purpose of
               | publishing new driver code, to avoid legal/IP minefields,
               | is super-expensive
               | 
               | Project Ortega did it to an entire gigabit ethernet
               | controller for the princely sum of zero dollars:
               | 
               | https://media.ccc.de/v/37c3-11781-adventures_in_reverse_e
               | ngi...
               | 
               | https://wiki.raptorcs.com/wiki/Project_Ortega
               | 
               | > Binary BL31 contains some unknown code to get HDMI-RX
               | PHY access working.
               | 
               | That doesn't sound like DDR training to me. Maybe now you
               | see the problem?
        
               | transpute wrote:
               | _> That doesn 't sound like DDR training to me. Maybe now
               | you see the problem?_
               | 
               | It is absolutely a problem, but it's bounded by the
               | ability to inspect and question code/behavior outside the
               | officially claimed rationale. We can prefer open systems
               | and also shine a bright light on the behavior of closed
               | systems.
        
           | spr-alex wrote:
           | SPR can run about anywhere docker can run. So if you have a
           | linux system running docker with these, you should be good to
           | go. We provide the OS images as one path to running SPR.
           | 
           | We are currently looking at banana pi over rockchip but we
           | are very happy to assist if someone has this gear.
           | 
           | I don't have access to Qualcomm information but if you have
           | those chips it will be under the output of 'iw dev'.
        
         | nox101 wrote:
         | This sounds very cool and IIUC could replace my
         | EdgeRouterX($60) I currently use.
         | 
         | Suggestion, your site is not understandable to me. At the top
         | it says you make routers. Under products it lists a a PI5 HAT.
         | Is that a router? It sounds like it's a Wifi card for a
         | Raspberry PI?? PI5 Pod, Is that a router? It says "bundled with
         | PI5 Router" ??? "CM4 Capsule" is that a router?
         | 
         | Is this site only for people who already know these terms?
         | 
         | It also claims all this runs locally but then says you have a
         | subscription... ?!
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | _> It also claims all this runs locally but then says you
           | have a subscription... ?!_
           | 
           | Looks like the subscription is for those who want to help
           | fund the project.
           | 
           | Not many functional differences, maybe those are handled in
           | the config GUI?
        
         | karma_pharmer wrote:
         | Most wifi baseband firmware "helpfully" leaks the true eeprom-
         | written MAC address in places like management frames and
         | beacons:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13839540
         | 
         | As of 2017 the authors of the paper above found MAC leaks in a
         | shocking 96% of all android phones. And the remaining 4% aren't
         | proven to be leak-free -- they simply hadn't noticed any leaks
         | by the time they wrote the paper.
         | 
         | Unless you have fully open-source firmware on your baseband,
         | like ath9k_htc, there's really no way to prevent this leakage.
         | Or even be sure if it's happening.
         | 
         | https://wiki.debian.org/ath9k_htc/open_firmware
         | 
         | With open source baseband firmware you can guarantee that the
         | baseband never even has access to the hardware MAC address. You
         | can even reflash the MAC address eeprom (on every boot if you
         | like!)
        
           | spr-alex wrote:
           | We actually have an intern researcher working on a path
           | towards an open source implementation of 802.11 for wifi 6
           | cards but do not have an ETA when our first proof of concept
           | will be released.
           | 
           | We've also reported mac leaks to vendors -- we found stations
           | would transmit packets with their non randomized state in
           | certain scenarios, we'll blog about it when vendors release
           | their fixes.
           | 
           | But more importantly I also want to say that I do not expect
           | the MAC leaks are happening in most beacons & probe
           | responses, which is what Apple and Google and others collect
           | for their positional database with wi-fi SSIDs and BSSIDs.
           | There's still ways to fingerprint, from digital fingerprints,
           | to signal fingerprints unique to the radio and antennas and
           | board, where machine learning can cluster and classify
           | devices that are going to be very hard to anonymize for
           | privacy.
           | 
           | Projects like https://www.nzyme.org/ actually apply
           | fingerprinting techniques for defense to detect Rogue APs
           | that could manifest in an actively attacked environment. They
           | can pick up wifi implants as well as the Rogue AP attacks.
        
             | karma_pharmer wrote:
             | _an open source implementation of 802.11 for wifi 6 cards_
             | 
             | For which baseband chip, specifically?
             | 
             | I mean this would be great, but I have a very hard time
             | believing any baseband vendor gave you enough documentation
             | to achieve that -- especially not without an OSS-
             | prohibitive NDA. Would love to be wrong about that. It
             | happened once, but that was back when Atheros was an
             | independent company -- before they were Qualcommized.
             | 
             | Also, aren't all the wifi 6 baseband firmwares
             | cryptographically signed? Best case it'll be as "open
             | source" as Tivo was.
             | 
             |  _We 've also reported mac leaks to vendors_
             | 
             | That's good, but I don't think the whack-a-mole approach
             | inspires much confidence. There have been _so many_ of
             | these problems that at this point we really need to take
             | the car keys away from the drunkard and have the baseband
             | chip and the MAC-bearing eeprom be separate devices which
             | can only communicate via the CPU. Or just have the CPU
             | derive the MAC from the CPU 's own serial number. Or maybe
             | just not have hardware MAC addresses at all.
        
               | spr-alex wrote:
               | Not all are cryptographically signed, no. We have no
               | special documentation but we are also not directly
               | modifying closed firmware either. We are working with
               | mediatek cards and will post more updates this summer. We
               | last posted about our approach 6 months ago,
               | https://www.supernetworks.org/pages/blog/barely-ap-
               | surfaces.
               | 
               | So the randomization bugs we have reported are
               | specifically about stations, namely: mobile smart phone
               | devices failing to randomize their WiFi MAC address.
               | 
               | As for the study this thread's topic concerns, I do not
               | have reason to believe that there are bugs with MAC
               | randomization in cards running as APs that would make the
               | randomization of BSSIDs fail.
               | 
               | The probe responses and beacon contents appear to
               | consistently use their randomized MAC address in the
               | cards we have tested. There could be underlying actively
               | triggered bugs an active attacker could uncover, to get
               | the non randomized address, but I do not expect such bugs
               | would affect the BSSID + Positional databases of this
               | study.
        
         | devjab wrote:
         | I'm not sure if I understand your project correctly, but can
         | this fix the issue with tracking people by location from their
         | phones? Either way it's a cool project.
         | 
         | I'm Danish, I think the only way to really prevent mass
         | surveillance through WiFi is through laws and legislation. It
         | used to be legal to track people here, but thankfully it's not
         | anymore. I still remember when there was an outcry from smaller
         | municipalities when they could no longer track people on their
         | "walking streets". I'm not sure if you have those in other
         | countries but they are basically the "central" street with a
         | lot of shops that are only for pedestrians. Virtually every
         | Danish city has one, larger cities have multiple. Anyway,
         | smaller cities used to track people to see which parts of those
         | streets were popular and which weren't.
         | 
         | Now they didn't exactly do it for sinister reasons as such. Our
         | smaller cities have issues with what is called "city death"
         | where their "waking streets" lose shops because people go to
         | larger malls. Then they might add a play ground or other
         | cultural things, or even help shops with rents in order to
         | increase an even popularity in their "waking streets".
         | 
         | Despite their good intention it was still mass scale
         | surveillance.
        
           | wolvesechoes wrote:
           | > It used to be legal to track people here, but thankfully
           | it's not anymore.
           | 
           | It not legal anymore, except when you are big enough or you
           | are the one that decides what is legal or not.
        
         | yardstick wrote:
         | From your site: " Why should your vacuum be able talk to your
         | doorbell? Inadequate network isolation makes breaches worse."
         | 
         | Just got to say- that would be awesome for my vacuum to stop
         | making a loud noise when someone pushed the doorbell, so I
         | wouldn't miss the person! (But I do completely get the
         | underlying sentiment)
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | An untrusted vacuum and doorbell can each talk to trusted
           | HomeAssistant for coordination, while isolated from each
           | other.
        
       | m463 wrote:
       | I think phones should have location-based wifi (and maybe
       | bluetooth).
       | 
       | Meaning, if your location is home, turn on wifi, else turn it
       | off.
       | 
       | Unfortunately apple/google/carriers have a vested interest in
       | making our devices very promiscuous. (location services,
       | advertising/surveillance, offload cellular, etc)
        
         | balderdash wrote:
         | That would be a great feature the only places I use WiFi
         | besides home/work is the airport/plane, hotels, and
         | occasionally other offices or people's homes. There is no need
         | to be broadcasting driving/walking around etc.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | This paper is about surveilling locations of APs (ie.
         | hotspots), not the devices that connect to them. Thanks to MAC
         | address randomization the latter is basically a non-issue.
         | 
         | >I think phones should have location-based wifi (and maybe
         | bluetooth).
         | 
         | >Unfortunately apple/google/carriers have a vested interest in
         | making our devices very promiscuous. (location services, [...]
         | 
         | You don't see the contradiction here? You want your phones to
         | have location-aware features, but right afterwards say that you
         | don't want it because it makes your device "very promiscuous".
        
           | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
           | >> Unfortunately apple/google/carriers have a vested interest
           | in making our devices very promiscuous. (location services,
           | [...]
           | 
           | > You don't see the contradiction here? You want your phones
           | to have location-aware features, but right afterwards say
           | that you don't want it because it makes your device "very
           | promiscuous".
           | 
           | I don't think it's a contradiction. You can have a phone that
           | knows its own location without telling Google/Apple where it
           | is, and that uses that information to toggle features. (I'm
           | kind of skipping the cell carriers because you _do_ have to
           | give them coarse location by virtue of how cell network
           | work.) A device can get location by purely passive GPS
           | without involving _any_ external services, but that 's a
           | pretty sucky experience (slow lock, low precision)... I
           | _think_ you can do AGPS without telling anyone where you are,
           | though. Anyways, my point is that there is a world of
           | difference between _you_ having your information /location
           | and anyone else having it.
        
           | m463 wrote:
           | If your phone has wifi enabled, it will collect AP
           | name+location for apple/google and upload it. The same thing
           | happens for bluetooth + ibeacons/edison beacons, airtags,
           | etc.
        
         | fallingsquirrel wrote:
         | You can set that up pretty easily with something like Automate.
         | https://llamalab.com/automate/
        
         | transpute wrote:
         | This could likely be automated by tapping an NFC proximity tag
         | (e.g. discarded transit card) at your door for entry/exit.
         | 
         | NFC avoids dependency on network-based location positioning.
        
           | KeplerBoy wrote:
           | You can also automate this by simply querying your gps
           | coordinates and setting up geo-fences around your home.
           | 
           | This was possible 10 years ago using tasker on android.
        
         | hnburnsy wrote:
         | Samsung has this on some phones called intelligent wi-fi...
         | 
         | https://docs.samsungknox.com/admin/knox-platform-for-enterpr...
         | 
         | >Intelligent Wi-Fi provides four features that aim to improve
         | consumers' Wi-Fi experience:
         | 
         | Network Bearer Switching
         | 
         | Auto Wi-Fi
         | 
         | Suspicious Hotspot Detection
         | 
         | Enhanced Power Saving
         | 
         | >Intelligent Wi-Fi is the new brand name of the existing
         | "Adaptive Wi-Fi" which had been applied to models older than
         | Galaxy S10 (e.g. Galaxy S9 or older models). It has been
         | improved by adding a new feature such as Suspicious Network
         | Detection and also enhancing existing features such as Network
         | Bearer Switching.
         | 
         | >Auto Wi-Fi >People use Wi-Fi differently based on their
         | location. In places where Wi-Fi is available, we turn on Wi-Fi
         | to avoid being charged for mobile data. On the other hand, if
         | Wi-Fi is always on, we are subjected to frequent, unwanted
         | connections and higher power consumption. To solve this
         | problem, we have introduced Auto Wi-Fi, which turns Wi-Fi on
         | and off depending on your location. Auto Wi-Fi addresses these
         | connectivity-related pain points.
         | 
         | >Auto Wi-Fi pays close attention to your connection patterns
         | and remembers your favorite networks. It turns your Wi-Fi on
         | when a favorite network is available. When you leave the area
         | and the network becomes unavailable, Auto Wi-Fi will
         | automatically turn off your Wi-Fi.
        
         | red369 wrote:
         | This can be set up in iOS using Automation in Apple's Shortcuts
         | app, e.g:
         | 
         | When: I arrive home
         | 
         | Do: Set WIFI On
        
         | roelschroeven wrote:
         | For that to work you need to have location enabled, so you're
         | now leaking your location anyway. Doesn't that defeat the whole
         | purpose?
        
       | juunpp wrote:
       | > We find what appear to be personal devices being brought by
       | military personnel into war zones, exposing pre-deployment sites
       | and military positions.
       | 
       | Is this verified? Does the military not ban Apple/Google personal
       | trackers?
        
         | lelandfe wrote:
         | One would hope after
         | https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/fitness-tracki...
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | Basically any sort of Android/iOS device by default will report
         | back the location of nearby APs. Given how important phones are
         | (eg. for entertainment or keeping in touch), it's basically
         | impossible to ban them.
        
           | eximius wrote:
           | Feels like the theatre of war where opsec literally means
           | life or death _to yourself_ , you'd be willing to leave your
           | device at base or faraday it or something.
        
             | karma_pharmer wrote:
             | Yeah but then millennials came along.
        
         | yellow_postit wrote:
         | Multiple militaries have had locations disclosed via Strava.
         | BYOD is everywhere.
        
         | ezconnect wrote:
         | That is a known fact and widely reported to have caused
         | security issues. Even in the Ukraine conflict if the Russian
         | army doesn't follow protocol of NOT BRINGING your phone to
         | deployment they get targeted instantly by US missiles. SIGINT
         | can map phone signals showing large group of people in certain
         | areas just by having your phone on and all this privacy thing
         | turned off.
        
       | croes wrote:
       | Original source
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40454706
       | 
       | Related article
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40464184
        
       | karmakaze wrote:
       | On my Android 12 phone, I have the following things disabled:
       | - [ ] Location         - Improve location accuracy           [ ]
       | Wi-Fi scanning           [ ] Bluetooth scanning       - [ ]
       | Google location accuracy       - [ ] Google location history
       | - [ ] Google location sharing       - App-level permissions
       | - Allowed all the time: None         - Allowed only while using
       | app: Maps, Lyft, Uber, Uber Eats
       | 
       | What's funny is when searching "location" in settings is that the
       | "Google ..." ones aren't listed and have to be hunted down
       | manually under Location/Location services.
       | 
       | I sometimes temporarily enable Location, but most often I'll just
       | enter addresses manually into the apps and dismiss any requests
       | for location access.
       | 
       | Of course anything with internet access can still guess location
       | based on the public IP address used to connect to any server.
       | Maybe a VPN could help, but then you have to trust that party
       | too.
        
         | blueflow wrote:
         | Be 100% sure by leaving your smartphone at home. Checking
         | WhatsApp & Co once daily is enough.
        
           | dannyw wrote:
           | This just isn't practical for anyone with kids, etc.
        
             | dark-star wrote:
             | I wonder how people checked in on their kids in the 90s,
             | before smartphones were a thing?
             | 
             | /s
        
               | cornflake23 wrote:
               | Tried it, alas, without success -Two big factors: 1. the
               | infrastructure that made this possible in the 90s isn't
               | there anymore (at least in my part of the world). 2. The
               | surrounding world requires information exchange at
               | physical boundaries. These too have now been "digitized".
               | 
               | Where might we turn to?
        
               | amatecha wrote:
               | The family could all get their amateur radio
               | certification/license and communicate over great
               | distances, for free, without any subscription fees,
               | tracking, etc. :) Sounds like I'm joking but honestly
               | with the presence of repeaters everywhere around any
               | metropolitan area, establishing communication would be
               | trivially easy (especially with agreed-upon "time
               | windows" during which to listen for each other and/or to
               | check in).
        
               | Aurornis wrote:
               | I grew up in the 90s. If plans deviated from what we
               | decided before I left the house, it was a huge chore to
               | communicate with parents. It involved finding a pay
               | phone, then calling a list of different numbers to try to
               | catch parents at the office or home or wherever they
               | might be. And it sucked.
               | 
               | It's weird to think that anyone would hold this up as an
               | example of the good old days. Rose colored glasses in
               | effect.
               | 
               | Notably, pay phones don't exist anymore, so you couldn't
               | actually replicate the 90s era communication if you
               | wanted to.
        
               | SapporoChris wrote:
               | Pay phones are not prevalent in the USA, but they do
               | exist. https://www.payphone-project.com/numbers/usa/
               | 
               | Some countries actually support pay phones. They're
               | amazingly useful during disasters when mobile networks
               | may not be functioning.
               | 
               | Example: Japan, but they're contemplating reduction.
               | "city areas are required to have a public pay phone
               | installed every 500 square meters, with non-city areas
               | every kilometer. "
               | https://japantoday.com/category/features/lifestyle/the-
               | end-o...
               | 
               | If your local region doesn't have a lot of pay phones
               | perhaps it is time to consult the local government.
               | Change can start at the bottom.
        
               | judge2020 wrote:
               | OP was almost certainly saying "don't exist anymore" to
               | indicate that you can't rely on them to be at every
               | corner gas station (or similar) anymore, thus making them
               | obsolete for such a purpose as checking in with
               | relatives. Their obscurity means you'll be unlikely to
               | find them unless you're close enough to something like a
               | full-service truck stop, which I've observed tend to
               | still have payphones.
        
               | sambazi wrote:
               | also grew up in the 90s and plans usually didn't deviate
               | from the plan because there was no way to communicate.
               | 
               | ppl just showed up, or didn't
        
           | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
           | > Checking WhatsApp & Co once daily is enough.
           | 
           | That is _strongly_ dependent on your social circles, and is
           | also a rather small subset of what smartphones are used for.
        
         | kingnothing wrote:
         | Regardless of all of that, your phone provider is selling your
         | location data derived from triangulated cell tower positioning.
         | 
         | https://krebsonsecurity.com/2024/04/fcc-fines-major-u-s-wire...
        
           | aunty_helen wrote:
           | I don't see enough talk about this. I thought someone would
           | have hacked up a solution to this by now.
        
             | pwagland wrote:
             | But a solution is basically not possible, short of running
             | your own cellular network. By definition the the carrier
             | has to know where to send the data that your handset wants,
             | and once they know which tower you are going out of, they
             | know your location to within a small degree.
        
             | Karawebnetwork wrote:
             | No SIM card in your main phone (now only a "pocket
             | computer"), burner phone for calls.
        
               | threecheese wrote:
               | How does this work for eSIM?
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | American Privacy Rights Act of 2024 is a potential
             | solution.
             | 
             | https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2024/4/committee-chairs-
             | cant...
             | 
             | https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/3F5EEA76-5B1
             | 8...
        
             | fsflover wrote:
             | Have a loot at Purism AweSIM service.
        
           | spr-alex wrote:
           | Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simjacker which was
           | being exploited by bounty hunters and all kinds of
           | adversaries
        
         | pests wrote:
         | > anything with internet access can still guess location based
         | on the public IP address used to connect to any server.
         | 
         | Not to mention Chrome & friends will gladly provide wifi-based
         | location lookup to any site that asks for location. You can
         | have GPS off, using a VPN, and still the website will know
         | where you are. Turn it off, sure, then the site can block you.
         | 
         | Tried to get around my states online casino restrictions a few
         | months back. Not a fun time.
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | > Turn it off, sure, then the site can block you.
           | 
           | Yes? Is this a problem?
           | 
           | > Tried to get around my states online casino restrictions a
           | few months back. Not a fun time.
           | 
           | How is any casino both (A) following state restrictions and
           | (B) not validating based on both your geo location and the
           | address you must validate via some KYC document? Or are you
           | also entering a fake address somehow?
        
             | pests wrote:
             | > Yes? Is this a problem?
             | 
             | Yes, because I am trying to use the site. If they block me,
             | I can't use it.
             | 
             | They validate, usually via a backend SSN lookup or via an
             | identity document like ID or passport, but only on
             | registration. Sometimes they make you take a selfie with
             | your ID. Sometimes you get flagged and have to identify
             | again.
             | 
             | In Michigan you are allowed to use the site from any
             | location, there are restricted actions which must be
             | location verified. Sports wagering and any casino gambling
             | obviously, but I think deposits or withdraws might be
             | location limited as well.
             | 
             | The location verification is accomplished via both a
             | dedicated program you must install on your device + giving
             | location permission in the web browser, which uses GPS +
             | Cellular + Wi-FI triangulation.
             | 
             | > Or are you also entering a fake address somehow?
             | 
             | You are allowed to use the online casino's with an out-of-
             | state ID or address. You must simply be in the state for
             | location verification. There is a little industry of people
             | taking road or train trips to travel through all the online
             | gambling states in order to sign up for the free promotion
             | money.
        
               | pests wrote:
               | For anyone wanting to know what I tried and how it ended:
               | 
               | This was on a laptop with no built-in GPS and no
               | cellular.
               | 
               | Paid VPN - nope, they probably have a list of all the VPN
               | providers IP addresses.
               | 
               | Self-VPN in cloud - no, again they probably have an IP
               | list
               | 
               | Self-VPN in target state on residential IP - nope,
               | something else causing the fail
               | 
               | Spoofing WiFi names & IDs in the environment of the
               | residential IP above, both from online databases and
               | having someone there do a scan - nope, I think the
               | problem here was the networks in range of the laptop were
               | lowering the confidence of the location check
               | 
               | Finding a browser that doesn't incorporate WIFI
               | triangulation - none that I could find, including all the
               | privacy-focused browsers like Brave. They let you turn
               | off location, but none let you disable the wifi
               | component.
               | 
               | At this point my thoughts were that I would have to
               | find/write a custom driver or find some other way to get
               | the wireless card to lie about which networks are
               | nearby.... or find a way to crack the casino location
               | service executable AND patch a browser not to rat on me.
               | 
               | There is no other sources of leaks from what I could
               | tell. No other signals being detected by my laptop, no
               | DNS or VPN leaks, it had to be the Wi-Fi triangulation.
               | 
               | I didn't want to do all that so instead just left a PC at
               | home hooked up to a PiKVM and it worked perfectly.
               | 
               | edit: Forgot to mention you must have Wifi on the device
               | or else it will block and ask you to enable it.
        
               | aftbit wrote:
               | Did you try on a laptop without wifi enabled?
        
               | pests wrote:
               | I added an edit at the bottom, not sure if you caught
               | that on your page load. Wifi off or disabled is insta
               | blocked.
        
               | aftbit wrote:
               | Oh yeah I missed that. So a desktop computer can't play?
               | Lame.
        
               | pests wrote:
               | Ya know what, I didn't actually test that but I would
               | assume. I've been on a laptop for awhile and all my
               | desktops have either a wifi card or its build into the
               | motherboard.
               | 
               | I did disable the driver and tried to make my laptop act
               | as if it didnt have WIFI at all, but I don't see how they
               | could protect a desktop from what I was attempted above
               | without WiFi access.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >Self-VPN in target state on residential IP - nope,
               | something else causing the fail
               | 
               | might be caused by the VPN connection reducing the MTU,
               | and the server detecting that.
        
               | hnburnsy wrote:
               | Can you run the betting app in an Android emulator, and
               | then control all aspects of the environment?
        
         | microflash wrote:
         | I've done the same. It is extremely annoying that there's no
         | concept of graceful fallback in modern operating systems. For
         | example, Google Pay on Android can work without location
         | enabled but whenever you start the app, it is the first thing
         | that it prompts you for (even before asking fingerprint or
         | passcode unlock that you've set on it)
        
           | bcye wrote:
           | You're still giving it away by which merchant you're
           | transacting with.
        
         | 3abiton wrote:
         | To be fair, apple has a similar approach, you can't fully turn
         | off Bluetooth or wifi if you press on their corresponding
         | widgets (they only become inactive), you have to go to the
         | settings to turn them off. As for location, you can't even do
         | so without going to the settings.
        
       | dirkmakerhafen wrote:
       | Wait what, this was not public knowledge?
       | 
       | I have been using apple geolocation api for the last 6-7 years to
       | regularly download a snapshot of all access points in the world.
       | 
       | https://github.com/dirk-makerhafen/apple-bssid (the basic request
       | code, not the mass downloader part)
        
         | ipsum2 wrote:
         | Does this still work or did Apples mitigations stop this from
         | working?
        
           | sambazi wrote:
           | it's a public api and public cloud exists, how would they
           | stop scraping?
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | Authentication via remote attestation?
        
               | sambazi wrote:
               | it's not a public api anymore if you have to auth, but i
               | guess you're right
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | No, I'm pretty sure Google (or Skyhook?) fixed this issue in
         | like 2012. I assumed Apple had done the same.
        
           | sambazi wrote:
           | what issue are you referring to?
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | They used to have an API that would let you submit a single
             | ssid and get its location. I believe their fix was that you
             | needed to submit at least 2 (maybe more) ssids and it would
             | only return the location if they were in close proximity.
             | 
             | Seems like Apple didn't get the message.
        
       | inasio wrote:
       | Nitpick: Figure 2 should have been loglog, rather than semilog-y,
       | I would love to see more details rather than the near vertical
       | line (graph is Cumulative geo-located BSSIDs as a function of the
       | number of API queries)
        
       | datahack wrote:
       | Has nobody ever heard of Google sidewalk or what?
        
       | _trampeltier wrote:
       | There is, since ever, a website with wifi routers and location
       | 
       | https://www.wigle.net/
        
         | sambazi wrote:
         | pls don't discriminate against ppl that lived in a world before
         | wifi was a thing
        
           | benopal64 wrote:
           | thank u for doing gods work. wifi-less people have been
           | around for centuries.
        
             | sambazi wrote:
             | and discrimination against us has absolutely soared in the
             | last decades
        
           | lgats wrote:
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingPrompts/comments/6vpej2/wp_y.
           | ..
        
       | transpute wrote:
       | "Why Your Wi-Fi Router Doubles as an Apple AirTag", 100 comments,
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40430603
       | 
       |  _> In late March 2024, Apple quietly updated its website to note
       | that anyone can opt out of having the location of their wireless
       | access points collected and shared by Apple -- by appending
       | "_nomap" to the end of the Wi-Fi access point's name (SSID).
       | Adding "_nomap" to your Wi-Fi network name also blocks Google
       | from indexing its location..
       | 
       | > "You may not have Apple products, but if you have an access
       | point and someone near you owns an Apple device, your BSSID will
       | be in [Apple's] database," he said. "What's important to note
       | here is that every access point is being tracked, without opting
       | in, whether they run an Apple device or not.. Commonly used
       | travel routers compound the potential privacy risks..
       | 
       | > The Google/Apple opt out (_nomap) needs to be at the end of
       | SSID name. Whereas the Microsoft opt out (_optout) can be
       | anywhere in the SSID name. Therefore, to opt out of both, it
       | would be in this order: SSIDName_optout_nomap_
        
         | canadiantim wrote:
         | Very very useful info, thank you
        
         | chevman wrote:
         | My guess is the opt out (versus opt in) nature of this could be
         | the seed of a massive class action lawsuit should the right
         | folks get involved :)
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | _> Asked about the changes, Apple said they have respected
           | the "_nomap" flag on SSIDs for some time, but that this was
           | only called out in a support article earlier this year._
           | 
           | If an SSID flag falls in the forest and no one is told to
           | read it, does it opt out?
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest_an.
           | ..
        
           | nerdponx wrote:
           | IMO the intrusive nature of the opt-out should be considered
           | as well. It basically requires you to broadcast to your
           | neighbors, friends, family, guests, etc. your personal
           | beliefs about data privacy, and then of course makes you
           | identifiable as a data privacy person by anyone interested in
           | targeting ads at you.
        
             | salawat wrote:
             | Yep. That's the poison pill. Oh, you don't want to be
             | tracked? Oh well, you have to let us track you so we can
             | treat you "different".
             | 
             | The change we should be pushing for is tracking must be
             | opt-in by default. The way God intended.
             | 
             | Thou shalt ask for consent before doing shit with another's
             | boxen.
        
               | rsync wrote:
               | I know of a better response...
               | 
               | List of ssids in some popular location and then duplicate
               | it, place-shifted.
               | 
               | I've been meaning to run this experiment for a while
               | now... Can I broadcast a set of ssids that make, for
               | instance, the mall of America appear on the Golden Gate
               | Bridge?
               | 
               | It surprises me that so much investment and dependency is
               | built on leveraging lists of ssids When they are so
               | easily spoofed...
        
               | sambazi wrote:
               | whatever you have been smoking, i want some
               | 
               | PS: you'd also have to spoof the mac addresses and get a
               | lot of clients to report it, but it could cause some
               | confusion
        
         | sambazi wrote:
         | please don't submit to this nonsense.
         | 
         | future you will thank you
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | _> this nonsense_
           | 
           | Because the flags are:                 (a) not honored by
           | M/G/A for removal from public db?       (b) ignored by other
           | parties?       (c) treated like telemarketing/spam opt-out
           | lists?       (d) ...?
        
       | acheong08 wrote:
       | I've been experimenting with this over the past few days:
       | https://github.com/acheong08/apple-corelocation-experiments
       | 
       | Found some interesting things and still working on recording more
       | MITM from my iPhone to see what else is sent.
        
       | edward1 wrote:
       | Here is a good summary of that PDF
       | https://learnlater.com/content/1778/Surveilling%20the%20Mass...
        
       | nbzso wrote:
       | Call me paranoid, but I have a habit to use a Faraday Bag. Saving
       | a lot of battery and knowing when and where to activate. Welcome
       | to the future. :)
        
         | clort wrote:
         | How does a faraday bag save battery? Normally I find that in
         | areas of poor mobile signal, the phone ramps up the power to
         | keep contacting towers and burns through the charge much
         | quicker..
        
           | mrbluecoat wrote:
           | Same. Airplane mode works better for me in these scenarios.
        
             | fsflover wrote:
             | Only if you trust that it does what it says.
        
       | Eduard wrote:
       | I find this paper's title "surveilling the masses ..." not
       | fitting for the (nevertheless important) findings in this paper.
       | While "mass surveillance" is an ambiguous term, it invokes images
       | of "this method allows wiretapping/reading society's private
       | conversations, and/or pinpointing everybody's precise location in
       | real-time".
       | 
       | But actually, the findings are:
       | 
       | "this method can be leveraged as an additional statistical proxy
       | for population movement and infrastructure outages/destruction;
       | 
       | By taking several assumptions (e.g. BSSID not spoofed; BSSID is
       | seen by some smartphone; BSSID of to-be-surveilled target is
       | known; BSSID is actually used by target and not sold/handed to
       | someone else; target is close to BSSID; BSSID is on; etc.), an
       | individual's historical and possibly current whereabouts may be
       | revealed".
        
         | whatupmiked wrote:
         | You seem to be attacking a strawman.
         | 
         | "The central goal of the attacker we consider is to gather
         | location and movement data about a large number of devices,
         | either globally or pertaining to a specific region of
         | interest."
        
           | Eduard wrote:
           | My critique is not about the paper _content_, it is about the
           | paper _title_, which currently (arXiv:2405.14975v1 ) verbatim
           | is: "Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning
           | Systems".
           | 
           | Understand it as a minor pet peeve on my side that I would
           | prefer a less sensational, better disambiguated title in
           | order for the paper to express its content and significance.
           | After all, it's arxiv.org, and possibly a preprint open for
           | feedback.
        
           | nonameiguess wrote:
           | It remains to be seen to me what information is really being
           | gathered here that wasn't already available. If you want to
           | know where people are, geographic population demographics and
           | residential density data is generally publicly available in
           | most places. If you want to know where they're moving to,
           | vehicular traffic, bus and train ridership, and airline
           | ticket sales are also public knowledge.
           | 
           | This is simply providing another way to say "humans who
           | connect to WiFi networks exist here, here, and here, and move
           | to here, here, and here." Without knowing who actually owns
           | and uses each device, it's hard to see how you can really
           | call this mass surveillance, which typically implies the
           | leakage of information that people expected to be private.
           | The fact that my residential address has a WiFi access point
           | in it does not seem to me to be private information. I can
           | readily guess with at least 99% accuracy that every
           | residential and business address in existence with visible
           | furnishing, decoration, regular cleaning, trash outside, or
           | any other sign of human occupancy, has a WiFi access point
           | attached to it.
           | 
           | The threat they mention of intimate partner abuse and
           | stalking whereby an attacker knows a specific person's MAC
           | address and is able to track them if they move but retain the
           | same device is a more obviously real concern, but easily
           | mitigated by simply not retaining the same WiFi access point
           | when you move to a new residential address.
        
       | pontifier wrote:
       | I was thinking recently about the inverse of this attack. I have
       | many thieves coming to my warehouse, and was thinking I could
       | broadcast bunch of local ssids to try to see which ones their
       | phones try to autoconnect to.
       | 
       | I could then use that info to figure out where they are likely to
       | hang out, and either give it to police or take matters into my
       | own hands.
        
         | p3rls wrote:
         | How much have you had stolen in monetary value just out of
         | curiosity? I went schizo myself for a few months after having
         | like $60k worth of stuff stolen from me when the cops did
         | nothing. But you sound like this is just happening continually
         | -- having this daily stress that's gonna get you or someone
         | else killed -- and you probably don't deserve the prison time.
        
           | hellojesus wrote:
           | At some loss value it seems like hiring off duty cops is ev+.
        
             | p3rls wrote:
             | Yeah I think everyone tells this guy that, and it'd
             | probably be a good start to try and get himself back in the
             | good graces of Pine Bluff's political types, but for
             | whatever reason it doesn't look like an option and he posts
             | on twitter that he's still getting bulgarized on something
             | like a weekly basis... From my experience I know there's
             | nothing more frustrating than these useless government
             | bureaucrats that can't be bothered to do their jobs until
             | something or someone explodes.
        
         | Hikikomori wrote:
         | Beacons take up a fair bit of radio space so if you're going to
         | have a lot then have it on a channel you're not using yourself.
        
         | heartbreak wrote:
         | Their phones search for known WiFi networks whenever they're
         | not currently connected to WiFi. You can monitor and log this
         | traffic. Many (most?) modern smartphones randomize their MAC
         | address when not connected, but a few years ago you could look
         | for repeat visitors this way, too.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | Suppose you found that they auto connected to mcdonald's wifi.
         | Now what? Are you going to stake out the local mcdonald's on
         | the off chance that the thieves hangs out there? Given how long
         | people keep their phones (years) and never clear their wifi
         | network lists, all this would tell you is that they visited the
         | given business at some point in time. It doesn't tell you
         | whether they frequent that place.
        
           | calvinmorrison wrote:
           | No but you may sell that location data to send them Fast Food
           | eDream on their Tesla AI VR Crypto Quantum Unit
        
       | ajsnigrutin wrote:
       | Offtopic, I know, but still...
       | 
       | > Wi-Fi-based Positioning Systems (WPSes) are....
       | 
       | Why does every articl have to invent some acronym, and even worse
       | in this case, an acronym that already exists in the wifi context
       | (wifi protected setup - WPS).
        
       | calebm wrote:
       | I published an open-source tool several years ago which helps map
       | out the wifi world:
       | https://github.com/calebmadrigal/trackerjacker.
        
       | ACV001 wrote:
       | wow this is huge
       | 
       | "Russia-Ukraine War First, we use Apple's WPS to ana- lyze device
       | movements into and out of Ukraine and Russia, gaining insights
       | into their ongoing war that, to the best of our knowledge, have
       | yet to be made public. We find what appear to be personal devices
       | being brought by military personnel into war zones, exposing pre-
       | deployment sites and military positions. Our results also show
       | individuals who have left Ukraine to a wide range of countries,
       | validating public reports of where Ukrainian refugees have
       | resettled."
        
       | jessenaser wrote:
       | On top of that, some networks like Spectrum already report all
       | the MAC addresses that are connected to it remotely to the
       | Spectrum database, instead of just on your network panel locally
       | (because there isn't a Spectrum network panel anymore, only the
       | app). This means that a nation state (USA) can see real time
       | minute by minute who is on that network, and recent devices on
       | that network because Spectrum designed this in their firmware.
       | 
       | You can check yourself from the app:
       | 
       | Services > Devices on Network > Manage
       | 
       | And it will show all of the MAC addresses connected, and recently
       | connected. Even remotely if you are not logged into your network.
       | 
       | You also can see the *plaintext* password to your router from
       | this app.
       | 
       | Services > Your WiFi Network
       | 
       | Which means a nation state also can remotely login to your
       | network without you knowing, and otherwise is bad for security if
       | passwords for millions of homes are plaintext.
       | 
       | ---
       | 
       | Moral of the story is that even if Apple eventually fixes this,
       | the other side of the tracking that nation states could do could
       | be done at the ISP firmware level. To solve this kind of attack,
       | either allowing open firmware or new legislation is the only to
       | stop this. (Which when has privacy legislation ever happened...
       | is another question for another day).
        
         | sandworm101 wrote:
         | >> To solve this kind of attack, either allowing open firmware
         | or new legislation is the only to stop this.
         | 
         | Or just randomize every MAC at the client level, blinding
         | everyone up the chain and no doubt causing many false reports
         | as randomized macs collide.
        
           | jessenaser wrote:
           | Yes this helps the MAC concern, but this means we need wide
           | scale device manufactures to enable this by default, because
           | users won't. Similar level of consensus.
           | 
           | Also why is some devices don't support this randomization, or
           | even if they do, the first connection is not supported. When
           | you first activate an iPhone or use a Windows computer, it
           | still does not expose all the settings to randomize the MAC
           | address until you setup the device, so the first connection
           | exposes the actual address to the network. Yet again we need
           | deeper levels of change to fix this.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-28 23:01 UTC)