In a collaborative effort, Apple and Google have developed an industry-standard detection feature called “Detecting Unwanted Location Trackers” (DULT) for Bluetooth trackers. This standard allows users on iOS and Android devices to be alerted if an unknown Bluetooth tracker is monitoring their location.
I wonder what it will be like on a long flight with this feature: there is an army of unknown Bluetooth items moving with you.
My sister has encountered that issue, when a kid on her school trip had an AirTag in his bag. Everyone’s phones rang
You’d assume they wouldn’t ping other devices when a paired iCloud device is in range and travelling with it.
It has to keep pinging so the iPhone knows it’s still close. Other devices detect that ping; it can’t choose who hears it when it calls out.
That’s the whole thing: they are constantly calling out to any Apple device in the area so that device will report to Apple the tag’s location through the Find My network. It has to call out, otherwise it can’t function as a tracker.
Which is where this new standard comes in. Alerting you to an unrecognized device nearby that is pinging out while you’re moving, because previously there was no shared standard that permitted this across all devices.
But there’s really no good solution to this that isn’t going to be messy and trigger a lot of false positives. It’s a band-aid on a problematic technology that has been normalized, and now they’re trying to back-port privacy into it to save face. All of this discussion should have happened before they started selling anything.
It’s bad enough to sell cheap consumer tracking devices and provide access to a whole mesh network of other people’s phones to use them on, without any consideration for what they would be used for. It’s especially egregious that they made that technology proprietary so Android devices could not easily identify a tracker near them.
That is how it works. Unwanted tracking notifications only trigger if separated from the owner for some time. It’s possible the paired iPhone was drained or had Bluetooth disabled which would cause the tracker to think it’s separated.
I bought airtags for my luggage and keys, but they’re registered to my iPad which is not my EDC device and is large. My main device is an Android. If I don’t take the iPad with me, eventually my Android will pop up with an “unknown tracker following you” message. The message iets you ring it to locate it, but nothing else. The annoyingest thing is that i cannot tell the android phone it is mine and known, and please stop pinging me about it.
Hopefully there’s a special case built in where it doesn’t do that if the original owner is still nearby?
I use AirTags when I’m traveling and would feel bad if mine set off 100 phones all at once.
For airtags that was, at least until recently, the case. You could only detect “lost airtags”.
Which makes sense, since only then they are relevant for stalking etc.
I’ve got an app that does this, it will detect them and send a notification but you can just ignore it
though I am very tempted by the little button that makes the device in question play a sound
The service already excludes any geographical tracker that is within range of its owner (as determined by whether the owner’s primary device is moving with the tracker).
They could probably use a few other rules, too, like excluding trackers that are moving with more than 10 other people simultaneously, so that some keys left behind on a bus, train, or plane don’t trigger the alert for a bunch of strangers.
Some airlines were trying to ban airtags in flights, probably for this reason.
No, they were trying to ban them (from checked luggage) because they are powered by a “Lithium” battery and airlines confused them with Lithium-Ion batteries. The latter ones are indeed forbidden in checked luggage.
I figured they were trying to ban them so we wouldn’t learn what they actually do with lost luggage.
No, that’s stupid. They don’t get anything from keeping that from you. And the main source of frustration comes from luggage handlers that are usually employed by the airports and not the airlines.
When they don’t give a damn, you won’t get your luggage. Like in this video where they insisted the luggage is still at a different airport. Because that’s what the computer said. And nobody looked for themselves which would’ve easily shown that somebody clearly forgot to do the arrival scan.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
No, both types are:
Since most people have no idea how many grams of lithium are in their lithium batteries, airlines just ban them from checked luggage outright.
It clearly says:
These limits allow for nearly all types of lithium batteries used by the average person in their electronic devices.
This is in general for carry-on and checked luggage. And then there’s the other paragraph about Lithium Ion batteries needing to go into the carry-on.
The solution would probably just be to dismiss the alert with a response like “I am on a plane, bus boat, etc. I’m traveling with strangers and their stuff”. Then it would temporarily remember all the local devices, and then dump that list after a set period of time.
I have always asked me when this would happen. So if I have a tracker on my bike the thief will now be notified of the situation.
Basically making a whole lot of potential use cases obsolete., or am I missing something?
I think the gain in privacy is definitely worth it. Just trying to understand if I am missing something
I have always asked me when this would happen.
Well, what did you say?
In some languages (like French) “I wonder” is said like “I ask myself”. So I think it’s a translation mistake.
Funny 😁
The part where tags are for finding lost, not stolen, items.
Stalking someone and tracking a stolen item without alerting the thief are identical situations, so you simply can’t make a device that works for one and not the other.One workaround that I can think of is if something like this was properly integrated to police systems, so that when you report the tagged item as stolen, the cops could switch it to a mode that keeps silent.
The trade of there is the police potentially have your location at any given time with the flip of a switch. I’d lose many of my positions before I have the police gang that much power.
Both Apple and Google’s location tracking networks are end to end encrypted. Moreover, Apple and Google have refused to put backdoors into their encryption protocols because it’s a massive opportunity for security exploits that could tank their businesses.
If the cops want to find you, they’re probably just going to ask your phone carrier to triangulate you with their tower network, which they’ve been doing for decades. That’s way faster and easier than jumping through hoops to somehow use the Find My or Find My Device networks.
For sure. That (theoretically) does require warrants, so there’s some level of red tape. That would for sure have to exist in this made up situation where talking about. No way do I want anyone able to just flip a switch and snoop on me, especially the police.
They would need to know what tag is yours, it’s not like tags have a subscription based contract with a company that directly links the device to you.
Unlike, you know, a cell phone. Which you carry with you at all times.
Quit reminding me that I purchased, and am reliant on, my own personal surveillance capitalism data-harvesting tracking-device.
Exactly. The tag IDs are anonymous and the clients are E2EE.
I’d be easier just to use cell towers.
I guess it helps against being stalked.
Yes that part is clear, but the question is about the collateral damage on legitimate usage.
This use case has been covered since these products launched.
Apple Find My to Apple Find My network got notifications. Android Find My Device to Android Find My Device got notifications. And if Android users installed Apple’s Tracker Detect, they got notifications.
Now cross platform tracking will happen without the user having to download and install an app.
If you were stealing bikes, and didn’t have something like Tracker Detect installed on your Android phone, you’re not the smartest crook.
I didn’t think of that. It doesn’t make trackers useless for preventing theft.
Phones are trackers in and of themselves. Just look back to the NSA controversy…
Regular people don’t have access to that data. They do have access to a $30 tracker, and people need to know if they’re being stalked.
Aren’t most of the data the NSA collects from third parties like Google and Apple who already sell that data? can’t anybody theoretically buy that data if its being sold? much like the mobile US carrier’s were doing
My gut tells me they only sell in bulk, you can’t just request your ex girlfriends dataset
My guess is that they don’t sell to none incorporated entities at all.
Google is buying your data, not selling it. They use it to make their ad platform more effective, and selling the data would just help their competitors.
The NSA does collect data from third parties like Google, but not just anyone can buy it from them.
deleted by creator
Of course Google is implementing the feature via Google Play Services. I get why, but man is it frustrating for everyone who doesn’t use or want Google Play Services on their phones. Hopefully other OSes can build this functionality in.
It’s a double edge sword, I’d would be nice to be built directly into Android AOSP, but at the same time if it was, phones without the latest Android wouldn’t even have it
They could easily put it in both and then use whichever is most up-to-date (would probably default to play services on any non-AOSP or degoogled ROM), which is what they would do if they actually cared about protecting users. But that would recognize degoogled ROMs as a legitimate platform, which Google doesn’t want🙄
can’t use it on iPhone without Apple services as well :(
AirGuard
deleted by creator
Could you elaborate? I haven’t got a clue what you mean.
deleted by creator
What do you mean by own though? I just don’t get the gist of your comment. How does it relate to Apple and Google working together to ensure these can’t be used for stalking? What’s your point?
I think it’s intended as a tongue-in-cheek comment about phones already tracking you, and the OEMs selling that data.
Also they’re completely ignoring the immense personal safety benefits that come with knowing if, say, an abusive ex has slipped an airtag into your car somewhere. This is actually a responsible move for once (assuming it works as intended) because it addresses an unintended but dangerous use for the product, and attempts to prevent it rather than just killing a useful product.
Yeah, I thought of that, but it didn’t make any sense with the context of the article. We already know we’re always being tracked, that isn’t what we’re talking about here.
If we’re going to have these trackers around, it totally is a responsible move to implement this feature, I agree 100%
If Android could stop “warning” me to enable Google Play services 8 times a day that would be great.
If you have a Pixel try running GrapheneOS.
Sure, but not the ones apple and google track you with
Well, good news, Bluetooth trackers are trash and inaccurate if they don’t use Apple or Google’s network.
Article feels heavily AI written or AI-extended.
They were so close on the acronym: “Detecting Unwanted Location Trackers” should be “Detecting Ominous Location Trackers” (DOLT). (“Obnoxious” also works but unfairly downplays the stalking/domestic-violence angle.)
They won’t stop selling iStalkers of course.
This feature has been around for a long time now
Androids? Is that the new term for Android phones?
For a moment I thought people had an android at home that would shout “DANGER, TRACKER!”
How do you refer to phones running Android? Calling them Androids is very common.
If the operating system doesn’t matter (like in this article and in most conversations), I just say: smartphones (or phones). If the operating system matters, I mention the operating system (android or iOS) once and then just call it phone/smartphone. Or Android phone. Never called multiple android phones “Androids” though.
I dont call two Microsoft pc’s “two Microsofts” either.
But today I learned that it is apparantly normal to call it Androids. I really never encountered the term before.
We’ve always said it like that?
My spouse and I are currently watching Star Trek: TNG, so I thought of Data saying, “Sir, there appears to be an unauthorized tracking device following our movements.”
This should be a TheOnion article 🤣
I… partially agree? There’s a bit of a difference between the targeted tracking a private individual does with an airtag, vs the generalized, but equally creepy tracking google/apple/others do through widespread tech. One definitely poses a greater short term risk than the other
So this essentially makes all the tag crap worthless…
Really only it you’re using it nerfariously it seems…?
Just curious but in what way/how do you think this feature makes them worthless?
I’m guessing they mean using it as an anti-theft device. If a thief steals an item with a tracker in it, they’ll be notified of the tracker’s presence by their phone and remove it. Of course, these trackers aren’t anti-theft devices and you probably shouldn’t use them to try confronting a thief on your own anyway…
I prefer the term “admirer”.
A geographically align fan
