EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

#AirTags #PhysicalTrackers #Privacy #Security: "It is impossible to make an anti-theft device that does not alert the thief that they are being tracked without also making a perfect tool for stalking. Apple is careful not to advertise the AirTag as an anti-theft device for this reason, but other makers of physical trackers such as Tile explicitly bring up anti-theft as a use case for their product. If physical trackers are going to have effective anti-stalking mitigations, then manufacturers need to give up on the anti-theft use case predicated on unknowingly tracking the thief and sneaking up on them. You cannot have both. EFF believes that people are more important than property, and we hope that the companies will come to agree. In any use cases that get defined in the specification, the security of those who do not want to be unknowingly tracked should be prioritized over the ability to track the location of stolen items.

Additionally, unwanted physical trackers should be accountable. Manufacturers should store the bare minimum of information about the phone or account that the tracker is paired to, and they should store it for a time and in a manner consistent with their data retention policies. The information should be made available to others only in response to a valid court order.

Any standard should also protect the privacy of the owners of physical trackers. We are concerned that having physical trackers rotate their identifiers only once a day will provide insufficient defense against a sophisticated tracking network. Weak privacy protections for a device that is frequently attached to keys and wallets could be used for location tracking by unscrupulous governments, law enforcement, and private actors. "

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security

EFFDeeplinks: The Industry Discussion About Standards For Bluetooth-Enabled Physical Trackers is Finally Getting Started https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/industry-discussion-about-standards-bluetooth-enabled-physical-trackers-finally #LocationalPrivacy #PhysicalTrackers #Commentary #Security