Android also transmits location data to Google

[forrestcupp]

According to this article (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/21/apple-google-receive-phone-users-locations/), Android doesn't just store the info on your phone, it actually transmits it regularly to Google.



In the case of Google, according to new research by security analyst Samy Kamkar, an HTC Android phone collected its location every few seconds and transmitted the data to Google at least several times an hour. It also transmitted the name, location and signal strength of any nearby Wi-Fi networks, as well as a unique phone identifier.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/21/apple-google-receive-phone-users-locations/#ixzz1KGDwTGct

[spoons]

C'mon Google, don't be evil.

[fuduntu]

According to this article (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/21/apple-google-receive-phone-users-locations/), Android doesn't just store the info on your phone, it actually transmits it regularly to Google.

Wait, but some UF'ers just told me that this wasn't possible when I mentioned the probability just yesterday (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10700617&postcount=24)!

This can't be possible..

I don't believe it..

No wai..


:lolflag:

[ugm6hr]

Couple of questions...
1. How does Google do that in an open source OS without someone noticing?
2. How can that data be sent to Google without using your mobile data allowance? Presumably this must be done with the collusion of the mobile phone networks?

[Spice Weasel]

Yet again, not surprised.

Also: don't care.

[aysiu]

Doesn't Android ask your permission the first time, whether you would like to send data to Google or not? (See attached screenshot--this pops up when you first log in and activate Android, and it also pops up if you decide later on to use wireless networks to determine your location.)

Does iOS ask the same thing about sending data to Apple? (That is not a rhetorical question, by the way.)

[RiceMonster]

Doesn't Android ask your permission the first time, whether you would like to send data to Google or not? (See attached screenshot--this pops up when you first log in and activate Android, and it also pops up if you decide later on to use wireless networks to determine your location.)

Does iOS ask the same thing about sending data to Apple? (That is not a rhetorical question, by the way.)

Whenever an app wants to track your location, you get a popup asking if you want to allow it to do so. I'm not sure how much of an effect this has on storing data on the phone, though.

[aysiu]

Whenever an app wants to track your location, you get a popup asking if you want to allow it to do so. I'm not sure how much of an effect this has on storing data on the phone, though.
So this whole hoopla about iOS tracking your location data is really about the apps tracking the data and not iOS? In that case, how is Apple responsible?

[forrestcupp]

Couple of questions...
1. How does Google do that in an open source OS without someone noticing?
2. How can that data be sent to Google without using your mobile data allowance? Presumably this must be done with the collusion of the mobile phone networks?1. Someone did notice.
2. I wondered the same thing.


Doesn't Android ask your permission the first time, whether you would like to send data to Google or not? (See attached screenshot--this pops up when you first log in and activate Android, and it also pops up if you decide later on to use wireless networks to determine your location.)
Well, that's encouraging. I don't remember if I had that option when I set my Droid up, but if I did, I'm sure I said no.

[Throne777]

So this whole hoopla about iOS tracking your location data is really about the apps tracking the data and not iOS? In that case, how is Apple responsible?

I got the impression that iOS was tracking your location (or storing some kind of location data, at any rate), independent of the applications.
It was included in the iOS 4.0 update (iirc), mentioned in their TOS, that they could gather the data & use it for themselves &/or send it to their partners/affiliates.

[el_koraco]

So this whole hoopla about iOS tracking your location data is really about the apps tracking the data and not iOS? In that case, how is Apple responsible?

The Google case is very stumm right about now. It's not the Latitude fiasco from last year. In the case of Apple, as far as has been determined, it's the iOS itself that stores the data if you use "location tracking applications". What that means, only heaven knows :D

It's Street View all over again. I mean, the info in both cases will only be used to junk spam you from time to time, but anyway, it's this annoying habit that everyone's been starting to pick up.

[3Miro]

Oh come on. When you receive a call, how does any mobile phone company know where to find you to send the signal? Every cell phone constantly transmits signal that is received and processed by the towers, thus every cell phone company can constantly track where you are regardless of what kind of phone you have.

If you have a cell phone, assume the cell phone company knows exactly where you are at all times.

The issue with Apple was that their phones would store such data on your computer and everyone with access to your machine can see where you have been.

[Throne777]

Oh come on. When you receive a call, how does any mobile phone company know where to find you to send the signal? Every cell phone constantly transmits signal that is received and processed by the towers, thus every cell phone company can constantly track where you are regardless of what kind of phone you have.
been.

Cell site location uses triangulation, which is far from an exact science. You only need to use Google Maps on a phone with GPS turned off to find out how vague it is ('accurate within 3000 metres' -hardly very useful for stalking someone).

[fuduntu]

Oh come on. When you receive a call, how does any mobile phone company know where to find you to send the signal? Every cell phone constantly transmits signal that is received and processed by the towers, thus every cell phone company can constantly track where you are regardless of what kind of phone you have.

If you have a cell phone, assume the cell phone company knows exactly where you are at all times.

The issue with Apple was that their phones would store such data on your computer and everyone with access to your machine can see where you have been.

So, in your opinion: Apple storing the data on the phone is not OK, but Google TRANSMITTING the location information to GOOGLE .. IS OK?

Talk about a double standard.

[aysiu]

Google TRANSMITTING the location information to GOOGLE .. IS OK? Google asks your permission first, as I showed you on the last page of this thread with a screenshot.

[fuduntu]

Google asks your permission first, as I showed you on the last page of this thread with a screenshot.

My point: the iPhone doesn't transmit it at all. ;)

[3Miro]

So, in your opinion: Apple storing the data on the phone is not OK, but Google TRANSMITTING the location information to GOOGLE .. IS OK?

Talk about a double standard.

What's the double standard? I am saying that sending data to the cell phone provider is inevitable, while storing it on the phone is totally unnecessary.

Your IPS always know which web-pages you are visiting. Your mail man always knows where you are getting letters from. The airline companies always know where you are flying to. Your bank knows which web-pages you are using to shop on-line ...

I don't want phones to track or safe info about me, but until technology changes, some of it is inevitable.

[3Miro]

Cell site location uses triangulation, which is far from an exact science. You only need to use Google Maps on a phone with GPS turned off to find out how vague it is ('accurate within 3000 metres' -hardly very useful for stalking someone).

Even 3000 meters can be used to cause damage, but I do hope you are right and this is the best they can do.

Any attempt from any company to gather information beyond the bare minimum required to provide the service should be resisted.

[forrestcupp]

Oh come on. When you receive a call, how does any mobile phone company know where to find you to send the signal? Every cell phone constantly transmits signal that is received and processed by the towers, thus every cell phone company can constantly track where you are regardless of what kind of phone you have.

If you have a cell phone, assume the cell phone company knows exactly where you are at all times.

The issue with Apple was that their phones would store such data on your computer and everyone with access to your machine can see where you have been.
But Apple and Google have much different motives than my cell service provider.

[aysiu]

My point: the iPhone doesn't transmit it at all. ;)
My point: you can't get upset about Google collecting your location data if you have explicitly agreed to them doing it after a pop-up prompt.

[aysiu]

Well, that's encouraging. I don't remember if I had that option when I set my Droid up, but if I did, I'm sure I said no. They ask you once when you first set up the phone, but you also have the option to turn it on and off even after it's set up.

Just go to Settings > Location and Security > Use wireless networks

If you turn it off, it's off. If you turn it on again, it'll prompt you as I showed in the screenshot.

[forrestcupp]

They ask you once when you first set up the phone, but you also have the option to turn it on and off even after it's set up.

Just go to Settings > Location and Security > Use wireless networks

If you turn it off, it's off. If you turn it on again, it'll prompt you as I showed in the screenshot.

I bought mine Certified Pre-Owned, so that's why I couldn't remember if it went through a normal setup.

Thank you, though. I went to the settings and it was turned on. I remember turning it on myself, though, because I didn't know exactly what it was. I thought it was a feature to use maps and other things if you didn't want GPS turned on. I should have known when Navigation didn't work with GPS turned off.

[KiwiNZ]

There is a prompt regarding location services that pops on the IPhone that gives the user the occasion to accept or deny.

[fuduntu]

My point: you can't get upset about Google collecting your location data if you have explicitly agreed to them doing it after a pop-up prompt.

I'm not upset about either, because I don't really care if Google (and perhaps) Apple know that I drove to work this morning. :)

[aysiu]

There is a prompt regarding location services that pops on the IPhone that gives the user the occasion to accept or deny.
So what's all the hubbub about? Is it the storing of the info as a plain text file? Or the accumulation of a year's worth of info?

[KiwiNZ]

So what's all the hubbub about? Is it the storing of the info as a plain text file? Or the accumulation of a year's worth of info?

Apple

[fuduntu]

apple

+1

[aysiu]

According to Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/04/android-phones-keep-location-cache-too-but-its-harder-to-access.ars), here's the difference:
Like iOS, Android stores these databases in an area that is only accessible by root. To access the caches, an Android device needs to be "rooted," which removes most of the system's security features. Unlike iOS, though, Android phones aren't typically synced with a computer, so the files would need to be extracted from a rooted device directly. This distinction makes the data harder to access for the average user, but easy enough for an experienced hacker or forensic expert.

Another important difference, according to developer Mike Castelman, is that Android keeps less data overall than iOS devices. "The main difference that I can see is that Android seems to have a cache versus iOS's log," Castleman, who contributed some code improvements to Eriksson's tool, told Ars. That is, Android appears to limit the caches to 50 entries for cell tower triangulation and 200 entries for WiFi basestation location. iOS's consolidated.db, on the other hand, seems to keep a running tally of data since iOS is first installed and activated on a device. iOS will also keep multiple records of the same tower or basestation, while Android only keeps a single record. Seems like six of one, half dozen of another to me.

It's not that difficult to root an Android device. I've rooted three different ones.

[PhillyPhil]

According to this article (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/21/apple-google-receive-phone-users-locations/), Android doesn't just store the info on your phone, it actually transmits it regularly to Google.

Different OP, I know but the title is new: ''also transmits'' -- the Apple one was ''iphone is tracking'' (no mention of transmission).

Android has a temporary cache. iOS has lifetime log. Big difference.

The (main) problem with iOS wasn't that it sends the data to Apple, but that it records this data forever on the phone and synced computers.

Apple sends the data every 12 hours (I think Android transmits with the same frequency). In both cases the user can turn off the *transmission* (and has to opt-in in the first place).

The transmission of anonymous data to Google (or Apple) doesn't seem like much of a problem to me (it's anonymous, and I actually trust them more than an incompetent government agency). The problem is unnecessary, unneeded, unused data being stored where anyone who gets access to the phone could find it.
In this respect Android's cache is far, far more forgivable than iOS's permanent log.

That said, I still think the Android cache is larger than needed, and is a security/privacy threat. I'm going to flash Cynogen - I've heard they offer, or plan to offer, full encryption by default (anyone have info on that?) and hopefully they respond to people's concern about this issue by paring the location cache down to the absolute bare minimum.

[PhillyPhil]

My point: the iPhone doesn't transmit it at all. ;)

I beg your pardon? On what evidence do you base that statement?

Of course Apple collect the data. From the horse's mouth: http://markey.house.gov/docs/applemarkeybarton7-12-10.pdf

[jcolyn]

So this whole hoopla about iOS tracking your location data is really about the apps tracking the data and not iOS? In that case, how is Apple responsible?

As already stated the TOS gives permission to track..

The reason the media is making such a hoopla about it is simply put it is Apple.

There's been a lot of iPhone/Apple bashing lately..

[fuduntu]

I beg your pardon? On what evidence do you base that statement?

Of course Apple collect the data. From the horse's mouth: http://markey.house.gov/docs/applemarkeybarton7-12-10.pdf

Prove that it does then.

Go ahead, lets see it.

All of the iPhone's location based services (discussed in your PDF) ask before uploading your location.

[PhillyPhil]

Prove that it does then.

Go ahead, lets see it.

All of the iPhone's location based services (discussed in your PDF) ask before uploading your location.

It's Apples pdf, actually. You opt-in once for this service, not for every transmission.

You can argue with Apple if you want (! good luck with that...), call them wrong, or liars, but I'm very comfortable taking the transmission every 12 hours as gospel when they're the ones saying it, thanks. ;)

The pdf is Apple's response to some US politician who requested info on this stuff a while back. See the first paragraph of page 9, and enjoy!

[DZ*]

When I'm abducted by aliens, Google Van will come and rescue me.

[fuduntu]

It's Apples pdf, actually. You opt-in once for this service, not for every transmission.

You can argue with Apple if you want (! good luck with that...), call them wrong, or liars, but I'm very comfortable taking the transmission every 12 hours as gospel when they're the ones saying it, thanks. ;)

The pdf is Apple's response to some US politician who requested info on this stuff a while back. See the first paragraph of page 9, and enjoy!


The latitude / longitude coordinates converted immediately by the server to a five-digit zip code. Apple does not record or store the latitude / longitude coordinates -- Apple only stores the zip code. Apple then uses the zip code to select a relevant ad for the customer.

So, they aren't storing your location.

Thanks for the reference.

[PhillyPhil]

So, they aren't storing your location.

Thanks for the reference.

Whoa, hold on there speedy. You know (and the rest of the internet too) that they do store data (you do know about the story that started all this don't you? They store location based on cell towers, remember?), although they still haven't admitted it. They also themselves publicly state that they transmit location data every 12 hours.

You can do any kind of acrobatics you like with this, but it isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference.

[fuduntu]

Whoa, hold on there speedy. You know (and the rest of the internet too) that they do store data (you do know about the story that started all this don't you? They store location based on cell towers, remember?), although they still haven't admitted it. They also themselves publicly state that they transmit location data every 12 hours.

You can do any kind of acrobatics you like with this, but it isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference.

/tinfoil hat

[KiwiNZ]

If you are scared of being tracked in any way do not...

Buy a smart phone or any cellphone
Set top TV decoder
Computer
Use a credit card , Eftpos Card, Debit Card
Building access card
Passport
Drivers Licence
Fly on a plane or take a cruise
Shop in a Mall
Go to the Doctor or go into Hospital
Buy a House
Get a loan
Go to School, go to University.
Get born, or die

I suggest you you sell up and move to the Sahara or Gibson Deserts, or the Amazon rain forest live there with nothing and die of boredom.

[CraigPaleo]

They are also putting RDIF chips in vehicle tires now.

[PhillyPhil]

/tinfoil hat

A brilliant retort.
I assume that's you realising you can't argue with simple facts? They store the location data, and according to Apple themselves, unless you turn location services off they transmit it every 12 hours.
I suggest you you sell up and move to the Sahara or Gibson Deserts, or the Amazon rain forest live there with nothing and die of boredom.

You're reading too much into my last couple of posts. They were just correcting fuduntu.
Different OP, I know but the title is new: ''also transmits'' -- the Apple one was ''iphone is tracking'' (no mention of transmission).

Android has a temporary cache. iOS has lifetime log. Big difference.

The (main) problem with iOS wasn't that it sends the data to Apple, but that it records this data forever on the phone and synced computers.

Apple sends the data every 12 hours (I think Android transmits with the same frequency). In both cases the user can turn off the *transmission* (and has to opt-in in the first place).

The transmission of anonymous data to Google (or Apple) doesn't seem like much of a problem to me (it's anonymous, and I actually trust them more than an incompetent government agency). The problem is unnecessary, unneeded, unused data being stored where anyone who gets access to the phone could find it.
In this respect Android's cache is far, far more forgivable than iOS's permanent log.

That said, I still think the Android cache is larger than needed, and is a security/privacy threat. I'm going to flash Cynogen - I've heard they offer, or plan to offer, full encryption by default (anyone have info on that?) and hopefully they respond to people's concern about this issue by paring the location cache down to the absolute bare minimum.

[KiwiNZ]

A brilliant retort.
I assume that's you realising you can't argue with simple facts? They store the location data, and according to Apple themselves, unless you turn location services off they transmit it every 12 hours.

You're reading too much into my last couple of posts. They were just correcting fuduntu.

Keep the personal stuff out of it.

And don't assume what I am thinking.

[Johnsie]

This whole thread looks like flamebait to me. If you don't want to be tracked then don't use the Internet or digital tv. It's as simple as that. One of the main benefits of online media is that it allows companies to collect information. They are scratching your back and you are scratching theirs. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Even Ubuntu keeps tracks on who downloads what from which repository, when and where....

[forrestcupp]

/tinfoil hat
Why are you so extreme in your support for Apple? Especially in a thread that is supposed to be about Android.

[Warpnow]

Regular, ordinary adults, should not be afraid of companies having access to basic tower or gps data. What are these companies going to do with that data that could harm you? The truth is very little.

The real concern for most people, in my opinion, is their friends and family being able to "check up on them" or monitor where they're going. Is your daughter/son visiting this friend's house? Is your girlfriend/boyfriend visiting their ex? Is my employee really at home when he says he's sick?

Its the people we have direct social relationships with, whether business, or social, that I think most people are more concerned about. The question then becomes...can these people access the data?

The answer, no matter what, it always going to be partly yes. That's technology. From what I've read though I'd be more worried about the iOS, though. Longer log, sync'd with a computer...it does sound easier to check up on.

Of course most of the people here could root an android phone fairly quickly with just google and some free time. But most people couldn't.

But it seems to me (and I very well could be wrong, I don't know much about it) that it would be easier to develop a product, or program, for sale that would get information from iOS than android...and software of this mindset exists. Software to monitor keylogs, emails, to monitor web usage. Could writing software to retrieve data from cell phones be profitable?

That's what I'd be worried about. Not google or apple knowing stuff. They're not going to do anything with the data that will actually concern me.

[fuduntu]

Why are you so extreme in your support for Apple? Especially in a thread that is supposed to be about Android.

I wouldn't call it "extreme", and I'm hardly showing them support.

It isn't like I'm telling everyone to run out and get an iPhone. I'm also not telling anyone not to run out and get an Android phone. ;)

It is just absolutely ridiculous to see all of these bull.... stories over and over again about how ${COMPANY_OF_THE_MOMENT} is evil!1!!1 blah blah closed source!!!1 blah blah oh so bad!!!1!!1! blah blah oh noes my location!!!1 blah blah must boycott!!1 .. cry me a frickin river. :D

[CraigPaleo]

I can see why people might care as any invasion of privacy can leave you feeling violated. But, even if some loony stole your phone, they'd probably be able to figure out your home address, among other things, just by the info you put in the phone yourself. The same for someone checking up on a child or significant other. In the latter case, it be the fact that they even snooped that would bother me rather than what they'd find.

As for Google, or Apple, I'm a mere statistic. I don't care what they know about me. Actually, if it helps to improve their targeted advertising, they're helping me. I'm going to see ads anyway so why not show me something I might actually be interested in? Facebook targets me with Linux, which is better than some random "get rich" or "get bulky" ads.

[TopEnder]

Well put, KiwiNZ may I suggest Rabbit Flat NT instead of the Gibson Desert.

If you are scared of being tracked in any way do not...

Buy a smart phone or any cellphone
Set top TV decoder
Computer
Use a credit card , Eftpos Card, Debit Card
Building access card
Passport
Drivers Licence
Fly on a plane or take a cruise
Shop in a Mall
Go to the Doctor or go into Hospital
Buy a House
Get a loan
Go to School, go to University.
Get born, or die

I suggest you you sell up and move to the Sahara or Gibson Deserts, or the Amazon rain forest live there with nothing and die of boredom.

[areteichi]

I see similar points made repeatedly here, perhaps in defense of the kind of control exercised by corporations such as Apple and Google. I actually find the points raised here nothing but a perversion of logic.

Yes, if you're an 'ordinary' and 'normal' citizen, then the government and corporations alike will not misuse your data. But we may just as well say the reverse. What would you do if you were put in a situation in which you cannot tolerate the behaviors of your government and the corporations? Will you still remain 'ordinary' and 'normal'? Or will you become vocal and hence extra-ordinary and ab-normal?

It is precisely this sort of way of thinking that I see here which serves to silence people, which in turn gets abused by the institutions to further their power and control.

The list I see just above my post is not a proof that we must tolerate and accept such invasions, but shows how much we have already lost our own control and security.

[CraigPaleo]

Most people can vote a politician out of office. We can also boycott products. Actions speak louder than words.

As for control, that post above yours shows that despite all the tracking, we are still in control of ourselves. As soon as an institution starts to abuse me with their power and control, that's when I'll take action.

[Johnsie]

I actually allow one company to track my location... Why? Because if I lose my phone or someone steals it I want to be able to get it back. It cost me alot of money after all.

http://preyproject.com/

[aysiu]

But, even if some loony stole your phone, they'd probably be able to figure out your home address, among other things, just by the info you put in the phone yourself. I do think people are unnecessarily making a big deal out of what is essentially a small deal (for some reason, when "stories" like this come up, there seem to be only two camps--"It's a BIG deal" or "It's not a deal at all"--can't it just be a small deal?).

At the same time, what you say here isn't true. I'd be sad if I lost my phone. If someone stole my phone, they'd know all sorts of things about me--what websites I visit, who my friends are and how often I call them, what apps I like to have installed. It would be an extreme invasion of privacy. But the one thing they wouldn't know unless Google were storing on the phone itself an unencrypted log of the past year's locations is my home address.

[Rachel_Eliason]

I have four things to add to this thread.

1.I just got an Android recently It was set up and synced by the salesperson, so he could add my contacts from my old phone, etc. I didn't ever see any consent form for tracking. However when I went to settings, there it was. It was set up for cell phone tower tracking only but my point is that the average user isn't necessarily setting these things up themselves.

2.How big of a deal is it? that's hard to say. I am worried about Internet companies tracking this kind of data because the law hasn't kept up with the technology. The only guarantee we have that they aren't sharing this information is their company privacy policy. At least with cell phone companies the police need a warrant to track someone.

3.Apple's storing this data in a plain text file on the phone is a much bigger deal because it would be easier to hack. What if someone found a way to access that file with a program like cree.py? they could track your location pretty easily. Google is at least using some encryption. (of course they have been hacked before...)

4.A lot of apps, like facebook,twitter and foursquare also track your location. This is the real problem with Internet privacy, lots of different people are collecting lots of different bits of data. Individually they all appear pretty harmless, but who really knows what it all adds up to.Hackers exploit multiple databases, combining the bits to get fairly comprehensive info on potential victims. At the risk of being thrown in the tin hat club, I think it pays to be cautious even if this particular bit seems safe.

[aysiu]

1.I just got an Android recently It was set up and synced by the salesperson, so he could add my contacts from my old phone, etc. I didn't ever see any consent form for tracking. However when I went to settings, there it was. It was set up for cell phone tower tracking only but my point is that the average user isn't necessarily setting these things up themselves. If the salesperson is consenting for you, that's a class action lawsuit waiting to happen. I wouldn't initiate it, but then they're consenting for you instead of you doing it yourself. I can assure you that the initial setup does ask you if you want to send data to Google.


2.How big of a deal is it? that's hard to say. I am worried about Internet companies tracking this kind of data because the law hasn't kept up with the technology. The only guarantee we have that they aren't sharing this information is their company privacy policy. At least with cell phone companies the police need a warrant to track someone. Don't worry about it. It already happens. ISPs know exactly what you've been searching for and downloading. And same for mobile providers. Why is Google or Apple any less trustworthy than T-Mobile or Comcast?


3.Apple's storing this data in a plain text file on the phone is a much bigger deal because it would be easier to hack. What if someone found a way to access that file with a program like cree.py? they could track your location pretty easily. Google is at least using some encryption. (of course they have been hacked before...) As I stated before, it's a deal. I don't think it's a big deal, but it seems it's easier for people to have heated arguments if the only two allowable positions are It's a big deal or It's not a deal at all.


4.A lot of apps, like facebook,twitter and foursquare also track your location. This is the real problem with Internet privacy, lots of different people are collecting lots of different bits of data. Individually they all appear pretty harmless, but who really knows what it all adds up to.Hackers exploit multiple databases, combining the bits to get fairly comprehensive info on potential victims. At the risk of being thrown in the tin hat club, I think it pays to be cautious even if this particular bit seems safe. The real "problem" is that privacy on the internet doesn't exist.
Privacy on the internet doesn’t exist (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/privacy-on-the-internet-doesnt-exist/)
Privacy on the Internet Still Doesn’t Exist (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/privacy-on-the-internet-still-doesnt-exist/)

[earthpigg]

They ask you once when you first set up the phone, but you also have the option to turn it on and off even after it's set up.

Just go to Settings > Location and Security > Use wireless networks

If you turn it off, it's off. If you turn it on again, it'll prompt you as I showed in the screenshot.

interesting - i just went there for (as far as i know) the first time ever on this phone. it was off. checking the box did indeed bring up the prompt you described. i said 'disagree', and the check box remained off. I cant imaging why anyone would ever say yes to a question like that, but I'm often part of a very small minority school of thought.

i guess i said 'disagree' when i first turned the phone on -- i've never noticed i was 'missing' anything.

So, I agree with aysiu's assessment. The consent popup is very short and in plain language;


Allow Google's location service to collect anonymous location data. Collection will occur even when no applications are running. [ Agree ] [ Disagree ]

For me, that question requires about 1/4 of 1 second of thought and I will come to the same conclusion every time. Disagree.

How can we blame google for collecting such data from people that have explicitly said they want such data to be collected? It's entirely opt-in.

I said 'heck no' from day one without giving it a second thought until coming across this thread just now. The majority of people have probably said 'yes, please'. Google is not the party to blame, here.

By contrast to Google's opt-in-stalking question, we have the GNU GPL that is presented the first time a user launches certain apps from the Android Market. I have read the document in it's entirety, and I suspect I am in the minority there as well. In that case, however, given how long that thing is - I can understand that many (most) people will click 'agree' without ever having read what they are agreeing to and thus I do have some sympathy for hobbyists that accidentally violate the terms of that agreement.

Not so with Google's simple question of less than 20 words - only a very very trivial amount of sympathy is felt by me. As in, "You made a choice you are now regretting because you chose not to read a 20-word question. I feel sorry for you."

[earthpigg]

(Yes, I've also read the Microsoft license agreement that came with installing the MS fonts that many/most of us have installed on our Ubuntu systems. Ditto for Adobe's flash. I've even skimmed the youtube.com terms of service. Again, I realize that I'm a bit of a freak in this regard. I have a great deal of sympathy for folks that get bit because they didn't read those extensive legal documents -- not the case with the 20 word question that is the subject of this thread. In fact, my hat is off to Google for the brevity of that question.)

[Thewhistlingwind]

(Yes, I've also read the Microsoft license agreement that came with installing the MS fonts that many/most of us have installed on our Ubuntu systems. Ditto for Adobe's flash. I've even skimmed the youtube.com terms of service. Again, I realize that I'm a bit of a freak in this regard. I have a great deal of sympathy for folks that get bit because they didn't read those extensive legal documents -- not the case with the 20 word question that is the subject of this thread. In fact, my hat is off to Google for the brevity of that question.)

Me and my computer science teacher both read them, and have both refused to do business with companies based on their TOU. Your not alone.

EDIT: Speaking of TOU, you are aware that this forums content is CC licensed, right?

[earthpigg]

EDIT: Speaking of TOU, you are aware that this forums content is CC licensed, right?

Yes, the attribution one (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/).


Public forum data is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

Folks that do work on the ubuntu wiki wait for consent/agreement from a poster before migrating a post on the wiki. That is an inefficient waste of time, in my opinion.


Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

If any of my posts (an element of the "Public forum data" of the work "ubuntuforums.org") could be useful to some outside project in any way, I don't want that other project to feel the need to wait for me to reply to their question about how to "attribute the work in the manner specified by the author". Attribute how you want, or don't. I don't care.

An alternative interpretation is that the part of my sig can be interpreted as "waiving" CC BY 2.5 attribution "rights", if one prefers that interpretation.

Either way, the point is that anyone can do whatever they want with my posts and be in the clear - beyond the limits placed by the CC BY 2.5.

[forrestcupp]

I actually find the points raised here nothing but a perversion of logic.Enter some smart person teaching us the difference between logic and reason. :)



1.I just got an Android recently It was set up and synced by the salesperson, so he could add my contacts from my old phone, etc. I didn't ever see any consent form for tracking. However when I went to settings, there it was. It was set up for cell phone tower tracking only but my point is that the average user isn't necessarily setting these things up themselves.Good point. This is good encouragement for us all to be more aware.


As I stated before, it's a deal. I don't think it's a big deal, but it seems it's easier for people to have heated arguments if the only two allowable positions are It's a big deal or It's not a deal at all.I like what you're saying, but I don't think it's possible to make one blanket decision on how big of a deal it is to everyone. I think there are varying degrees of the size of the "deal" according to the person. Right or wrong, there are people who have more to hide than others, and this is a bigger deal to someone like that than to a normal person who is just a statistic. I, personally, do not have much to hide, but some people legitimately do.


i said 'disagree', and the check box remained off. I cant imaging why anyone would ever say yes to a question like that, but I'm often part of a very small minority school of thought.Well, for some reason I thought that it was required for apps like Maps and Navigation. That's why I initially said yes. When I found out what it really is, I turned it right off.

[CraigPaleo]

I do think people are unnecessarily making a big deal out of what is essentially a small deal (for some reason, when "stories" like this come up, there seem to be only two camps--"It's a BIG deal" or "It's not a deal at all"--can't it just be a small deal?).

At the same time, what you say here isn't true. I'd be sad if I lost my phone. If someone stole my phone, they'd know all sorts of things about me--what websites I visit, who my friends are and how often I call them, what apps I like to have installed. It would be an extreme invasion of privacy. But the one thing they wouldn't know unless Google were storing on the phone itself an unencrypted log of the past year's locations is my home address.

I think it can be a small deal. I have no concerns about a company using my stats anonymously. I think it's a little more concerning that an individual in my own neighborhood, could invade my privacy. It's just that there is already so much info that most of us keep on our phones that I don't think finding out where I've been adds to it all that much - not enough to keep me from using it. Frankly, I'd be more concerned about losing my wallet.

I might feel a little more strongly if there were no choice and it were forced on everyone but it's not.

[Throne777]

Episode 2, season 6 of CSI:NY is an episode where a computer hacker essentially uses everyday technology to bump off people he doesn't like.
It's an interesting case for people taking a lot of things for granted, where if you think about it for long enough someone with the know-how can pull off some rather scary things.
I'm not saying we should throw all our technology away, far from it, but with our increasingly lax approach to personal information (Facebook throwing several elephants into the room at this point), it does look like many people just underplay or don't appreciate what all this can amount to.
Just today I read about teachers not getting hired because of information or pictures that were on their Facebook pages (many companies are now using Google, Facebook etc to vet potential candidates).
Hell, the Library Of Congress is now storing every tweet ever from Twitter (http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2010/04/how-tweet-it-is-library-acquires-entire-twitter-archive/). How many throwaway comments do people make daily that end up getting them into trouble later on? There's been loads of news reports (at least in the UK) where some politican or other official has said some off handed remark & then either got fired, or had to publicly flog themselves because of it. & this is only going to become more frequent as the technology becomes more widely used & accepted.
Location data isn't itself the end of the world & isn't always a bad thing. The trouble comes when people become so lax they don't realise what they're giving away and the possible consequences of doing it.
The main thing to take away is to just keep on your toes about what you take for granted.

[Rachel_Eliason]

Don't worry about it. It already happens. ISPs know exactly what you've been searching for and downloading. And same for mobile providers. Why is Google or Apple any less trustworthy than T-Mobile or Comcast?


There is one fairly important difference. Neither Google or Apple are "phone companies" and it's a gray area legally whether they have to follow FCC regulations. This is what I mean by saying the law hasn't kept up with technology.

I don't really think either Google or Apple are doing anything nefarious with our location data. But as the field continues to grow there are likely to be many more companies in the game. Google and Apple should set transparent policies on consumer data to help set an industry precedent. (Whether they will or not is another question...)