iPhone location data used by US government to track coronavirus spread
The US government is allegedly attempting to track the coronavirus pandemic by taking advantage of geolocation data generated by online advertising shown on iPhones and other smartphones, intending to learn how the virus is spreading throughout the country.
On Wednesday, it was announced a collection of mobile carriers in Europe will share customer location data with the European Commission to monitor the spread of the coronavirus. On Saturday, a report surfaced suggesting a similar program is being carried out in the United States, but in a slightly different manner.
According to the Wall Street Journal, several government officials have acquired the location data for millions of smartphones and mobile devices across the country. Sources claim the federal government, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and state and local governments are receiving reports about the presence and movement of mobile phone users in specific areas of interest.
It is unclear if the effort is linked to a March 17 report about the US government discussing the use of location data sourced from Google and Facebook for similar efforts. In that instance, there was the suggestion of anonymized location data being handed over to map the spread of the outbreak, allowing experts to understand patterns of people's movements and to predict probable hotspots for viral activity.
Rather than being sourced from the carriers directly, as with the European program, the US version acquires its data from mobile advertising trackers. An area that Apple and privacy advocates have fought against, the tracking usually allows a marketer to determine where customers physically go to, which can allow for regionalized targeted advertising campaigns to run, as well as to monitor a campaign's effectiveness.
The data is said to be anonymized, meaning the location data will be able to show where someone travels, but not their identity. Such anonymous and aggregated data is useful in showing general trends, without revealing an individual's specific movements or motives.
It is suggested the project is aiming to collect data for as many as 500 US cities, including which retailers and public places are still being visited by large numbers of people, making them a breeding ground for virus transmission. Some researchers are already discovering areas like Brooklyn's Prospect Park that still draw crowds.
The same data may also be able to help assist in monitoring the economic impact of the pandemic, showing reduced retail visits and vehicle journeys, among other metrics.
The use of advertising-derived location tracking data has led some privacy advocates to suggest the industry was using the coronavirus to try and make the privacy infringement technology more acceptable to regular users.
Privacy researcher Wolfie Christl admits there are some advantages to using aggregated data in this way, "even if the data is being gathered secretly or illegally by companies," but warns there are still risks. "As true anonymization of location data is nearly impossible, strong legal safeguards are mandatory," Christl urges, due to the possibility of combining the data with other information to identify and track specific people.
On Wednesday, it was announced a collection of mobile carriers in Europe will share customer location data with the European Commission to monitor the spread of the coronavirus. On Saturday, a report surfaced suggesting a similar program is being carried out in the United States, but in a slightly different manner.
According to the Wall Street Journal, several government officials have acquired the location data for millions of smartphones and mobile devices across the country. Sources claim the federal government, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and state and local governments are receiving reports about the presence and movement of mobile phone users in specific areas of interest.
It is unclear if the effort is linked to a March 17 report about the US government discussing the use of location data sourced from Google and Facebook for similar efforts. In that instance, there was the suggestion of anonymized location data being handed over to map the spread of the outbreak, allowing experts to understand patterns of people's movements and to predict probable hotspots for viral activity.
Rather than being sourced from the carriers directly, as with the European program, the US version acquires its data from mobile advertising trackers. An area that Apple and privacy advocates have fought against, the tracking usually allows a marketer to determine where customers physically go to, which can allow for regionalized targeted advertising campaigns to run, as well as to monitor a campaign's effectiveness.
The data is said to be anonymized, meaning the location data will be able to show where someone travels, but not their identity. Such anonymous and aggregated data is useful in showing general trends, without revealing an individual's specific movements or motives.
It is suggested the project is aiming to collect data for as many as 500 US cities, including which retailers and public places are still being visited by large numbers of people, making them a breeding ground for virus transmission. Some researchers are already discovering areas like Brooklyn's Prospect Park that still draw crowds.
The same data may also be able to help assist in monitoring the economic impact of the pandemic, showing reduced retail visits and vehicle journeys, among other metrics.
The use of advertising-derived location tracking data has led some privacy advocates to suggest the industry was using the coronavirus to try and make the privacy infringement technology more acceptable to regular users.
Privacy researcher Wolfie Christl admits there are some advantages to using aggregated data in this way, "even if the data is being gathered secretly or illegally by companies," but warns there are still risks. "As true anonymization of location data is nearly impossible, strong legal safeguards are mandatory," Christl urges, due to the possibility of combining the data with other information to identify and track specific people.
Comments
Yeah, but this probably contains additional information besides just time/location.
They probably don't have any virus-related info, unless the anonymous aspect has been breached (which it very well may be). But, they can track traffic patterns, and especially analyze them around sites where they know an infection has taken place.
Now if you actually knew which people had been infected (but pronounced recovered) and knew their cell phone number. Then, you might be able to determine if the virus is able to go temporary dormant (undetectable) but the people still be infectious.
In China (etc) some people have been pronounced infected, clean, and infected again. Was the virus just dormant before making a resurgence? Or, are people are getting infected all over again.
I don’t know which is worse. When you get sick and recover, you should build up antibodies that prevent reinfection. If that protection only lasts a few weeks... that would be bad, really bad.
In some other countries their governments continue to tract people that were infected using cell phones. The US’s anonymous data collection is almost useless by comparison.
If the App provided localized data, virus tracking, quarantine information, recommendations on what to do if you’re sick, if schools are closed, businesses that are open, those that deliver, etc. it would see a lot of usage. And, the user data would be useful!
What most people are getting now is a President saying it will be business as usual real soon. That he’s not sure closing businesses is a good idea. Then, he’s ordering GM to make ventilators, and considering putting multiple states under quarantine. Talk about mixed messages...
A major part of what you see as the problem was caused by Trump and his repeated minimization / marginalization of the danger of this virus. Until it was running out of control he was telling the American public not to worry about a thing. In fact, even today with over 100,000 infected, many continue to think its all a Democratic hoax to make the Fiddler in Chief look bad. Nobody has to do that for him. It's the one thing he's good at.
I guess I don’t really get it. Sure, cool tech; we can see the “potential impact”, ok, neat visualization. But that’s all this hush-hush data grab is really. Neat visualizations that show “potential”. Not that useful, unless as other posters have pointed out, it’s not so anonymized. And even, then it’s only truly useful unless this non-anonymized info includes a patient’s COVID-19 status.
And make it easier to do so the next time there's a national emergency and the next time and then it's the norm.
The biggest problem is Trump's America First policy and denial of a major problem in the offing, which led to the U.S. not testing early enough and often enough. We're still not testing enough! But for Trump's decisions, we could have been testing on a large scale 2 months ago, isolating and contact tracing. (Remember Trump saying he didn't want the passengers of the Princess cruiseship to enter the country because it would make our numbers look worse? It's all about politics to him. He could care less about us.)