1 sat \ 3 replies \ @xz 30 Mar 2023 \ on: The DEA Quietly Turned Apple’s AirTag Into A Surveillance Tool bitcoin
I remember when all the airlines were losing everyone's luggage every day. People started using them and some airlines tried to stop it. The problem is technology is blamed. I also remember buying an OTG camera that carried a warning about only using it for legal purposes. I suppose I could also played DEA for the day or a pervert. So far I have only ever used it as a camera connected to my computer, an electronic consumer devices, that's all.
I really don't like seeing or hearing of police and security asking people to not use their phones to lawfully document events in a public place. If I can't do that, why would cellular electronic consumer products have initially been equipped with cameras? Why would they even be made available to the general public?
The DEA didn't turn Apple's Airtag into a surveillance tool. It is a surveillance tool, and I guess all lines of professions that surveil things carry around a bunch of these, attach them to stuff and go eat donuts. Probably all wear Google glass too (joking.) But seriously, I might not feel good about Apple's privacy assurances but I don't think this is really something that they have to own.
I agree that technology itself is simply a tool and it's humans who should be judged for moral implications of how tools are used.
However, Apple made a very big deal about how they designed these Airtag things specifically so they couldn't be used to stalk people like this. They explicitly claimed Airtags were designed to prevent this and make them unattractive for surveillance purposes.
It was already obvious this was bullshit, granted, but the fact even the feds are using them to track people shows just how good they really are at the job.
reply
Airtags were designed to prevent this and make them unattractive for surveillance purposes.
Yeah. Point taken. There is the onus on corporations to be responsible for their statements and the reality of it. I wasn't aware of their statements, point was more speaking to the general technologic landcape and how intended use cases might get coopted.
I think the propblem lies in the fact there is general interest and potential use cases for all technology, as UAV /drones were developed and packaged as a hobby/maker-type industry, or Protonmail trying it's best to make money by providing a decent end-end encryption email platform. Clearly there's a market for all these kinds of tools. But there always seems to come a point where 'best efforts' fall short to honor user/public concerns.
I guess people might point to some tech being more fitting to offensive, some more defensive but I think this is not easy to diffrentiate. If you enforce bans on comsumer/citizen use of tech, you also take away defensive, counter-measures, etc.
Maybe Apple cashed in on this without thinking over privacy concerns. But not sure that it's such a difference from slipping an iphone 4 or an ipad-mini, or any small device with a battery that can't be removed into a surveillance target.
reply
I'm with you. Just providing some context I think is important regarding Apple's own statements on how Airtags were designed to be privacy conscious when this is false.
I certainly am not arguing in favour of any bans. That would be ineffective and lead to a situation where the tech ends up mostly in the hands of criminals and the state (as if there's a difference) which naturally encourages malicious use cases.
Pointing out yet another example of Apple lying about privacy is important for anyone who actually buys into their marketing though. I know people on this site don't, but I bet most us know people who do.
Many times I have heard "iPhones are more private because Apple said so" when this is downright false. Stock Android is no better, but that's the point, they're just as bad as each other. At least with Android you have the choice to install GrapheneOS and other privacy and security conscious options.
P.S. I find Proton to be a decent compromise between privacy and convenience. Since all the encryption (including Proton Drive) is using Ed25519 PGP, I do wish they would let me upload my own public key while keeping the private key to myself, that way there would be client-side encryption and it'd be much more valuable for true zero knowledge privacy.
reply