Apple-Google Exposure Notification system worthless due to privacy policies, health expert...

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 98
    longpathlongpath Posts: 398member
    The sad thing is that the arguments being made in favor of dispensing with privacy protection parallel arguments used by German National Socialists in the 1930s & ‘40. The phrase, which became a slogan, translates roughly as “It’s for your safety.” I would vastly prefer an API with privacy protection as a core focus to the Microsoft venture that Connecticut announced they will be using.
    israndydewmerandominternetpersonmattinoz
  • Reply 22 of 98
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 2,115member
    svanstrom said:
    dutchlord said:
    No way I am going to use any covid app. I don’t trust any of the parties involved. 
    ...
    All this tracking could for instance be implemented at a network level where they use triangulation data to calculate the risks to individuals, which are at a certain risk level then targeted with an sms telling them that they should go to one of a list of providers doing COVID-19 testing.

    That seems like the most feasible solution, considering that device based solutions would require the latest version of the OS.
    edited May 2020
  • Reply 23 of 98
    ApplePoorApplePoor Posts: 291member
    When I was active in Search & Rescue for missing aircraft, the doctors were the worst in flying as they thought the rules did not apply to them. So going lower than the published minimums would find them trying to fly through a forest as the plane broke into bits and pieces, just like their bodies.  Or they would fly into known icing conditions with a plane not approved for such flight. At least the bodies were still frozen for awhile, if the wreck was ever found....

    The cure for stupid is very often fatal.
    lkruppjony0happywafflelongpathlollivermike1beeble42
  • Reply 24 of 98
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    xbit said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    Oh, the whining …

    And I see the users in the UK trial are complaining about the battery drain, as predicted by just about everybody outside NHSX. 

    Next step for the UK: a humiliating climb down smothered in a pack of lies designed to make it look as though this was the plan all along. 

    “Our original system was designed to provide a test baseline for the eventual rollout of our app using the Apple/Google API. We are pleased to report that the real system, which we always planned to release, is working exactly as we intended.”
    The elephant in the room is that Apple’s new API will only work on devices running the very latest version of iOS (and the same for Android). This kind of app requires mass adoption so Apple and Google new API is next to useless. 

    NHSX were right to explore alternatives.

    As of January 2020, Apple reckons that 77% of iPhones bought in the last four years are running the latest version of  iOS … and that was five months ago (don't no the numbers for Android), which certainly makes it a lot more useful than the NHSX app, and all sides know it, which is why Apple/Google didn't didn't even blink while NHSX, having not even read the Apple/Google spec, whined about how unfair 'big companies' were being.

    And no, the NHSX weren't right to explore an alternative they knew was never going to fly due to the battery drain. That was just pouring money down the drain. This is the same sort of 'Little Britain' hubris we're used to seeing from the public school tosspots running the country. Did you honestly think that a system that an app that has to hog the CPU and drain the battery was ever going to fly.

    And let's not forget that given the government's track record, the system will be hacked within about a month of it being released. It still will be with the Apple/Google API, but at least the thieves will only get a list of encrypted tokens.

    At least the Germans saw sense before they embarrassed themselves.

    DAalsethaderutterjony0longpathlolliver
  • Reply 25 of 98
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    DAalseth said:
    Doctor’s Disease. That’s what we called it years ago. Just because the person was a medical Doctor they would think they knew best about everything, from running a business to fixing their radio. We had Doctors absolutely blow up at us because we wouldn’t do something the way they thought it should be done, whether it violated laws or not. Whether it might literally kill them or not. 

    So in this case these Doctors think they know better than professional programmers how  a system should be programmed to run and better than professional data security people how private data should be handled. Plus as the article pointed out their own complaints show that they don’t really know how the Apple/Google system actually works.  Typical Doctor’s Disease. If they think they know how to do it better they need to get off their collective @$$es and do it. Nothing is forcing them to use the Apple/Google APIs. 

    Other than the fact that they don’t know how. 


    This is not the doctors (the two I know weren't going to run the NHSX app on their phones either).

    NHSX is a branch of the government that is overseeing the digital transformation of the Health Service. It is not actually part of the health service. The actual work will be carried out by anonymous consultancies who will bus in staff, salesmen and contractors with the aim of earning as much as they can for as long as possible. 

    There will be no doctors involved in any decision regarding system implementation because that would make sense. So let's not blame the doctors.

    The 'X' in NHSX stands for 'experience', and that should tell you all you need to know.
    jony0
  • Reply 26 of 98
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,965member
    ApplePoor said:
    When I was active in Search & Rescue for missing aircraft, the doctors were the worst in flying as they thought the rules did not apply to them. So going lower than the published minimums would find them trying to fly through a forest as the plane broke into bits and pieces, just like their bodies.  Or they would fly into known icing conditions with a plane not approved for such flight. At least the bodies were still frozen for awhile, if the wreck was ever found....

    The cure for stupid is very often fatal.
    Coincidentally it was a General Aviation business my family ran when I was growing up. I LITERALLY remember one Doctor yelling "I'm the head of Surgery at <local hospital> and I know what I'm talking about." Dad just told him to take it somewhere else then. A month later, after finding out that none of the FBOs in the area would do it the way he wanted, he brought the plane back and we did the repair the way the manufacturer and the FAA said it had to be done.
    israndylongpathlolliver
  • Reply 27 of 98
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Sad how much bad press Apple gets for its privacy-first approach. 
    Next thing you know Bloomberg will be publishing an editorial accusing Apple of aiding and abetting the spread of the virus. Watch for it.


    Speaking of Bloomberg (I know, Bloomberg) I read a blurb from them about this topic in which they state that downloads and installations of these tracking apps are not going as well as the governments had hoped. People are ignoring them. Here’s the scary part. Bloomberg claims that Apple and Google’s framework can eventually be used to anonymously track without an app installed. If true that’s a whole different ballgame.  But it’s Bloomberg we’re talking about here.
    edited May 2020 longpath
  • Reply 28 of 98
    jimh2jimh2 Posts: 656member
    Why would anyone use this type of software no matter who makes it or what it does? It’s a feel good non-solution to a problem that will only be solved with time. If you live and/or work in a big city or use public transportation you see screwed with or without the software. 
  • Reply 29 of 98
    xbitxbit Posts: 398member
    svanstrom said:

    As far as the new API being next to useless… well… at least people on the Apple-side of the isle are quite good at keeping their phones updated, and the app could simply launch a huge "push here to update your phone to a compatible level"-button if it isn't. So no need to call it "next to useless" before actually tried; because it could be just that level of extra needed to "flatten the curve" just right.
    Any COVID tracking app needs about 60% adoption to be effective. This figure isn’t a guess - it’s based on on-going trials.

    That means that the app needs to run on as wide a range of devices as possible as a considerable number of people will refuse to install it. Something that only runs on iOS 13.5 and Android 11.who-knows isn’t going to get the necessary adoption rate.
  • Reply 30 of 98
    svanstromsvanstrom Posts: 702member
    xbit said:
    svanstrom said:

    As far as the new API being next to useless… well… at least people on the Apple-side of the isle are quite good at keeping their phones updated, and the app could simply launch a huge "push here to update your phone to a compatible level"-button if it isn't. So no need to call it "next to useless" before actually tried; because it could be just that level of extra needed to "flatten the curve" just right.
    Any COVID tracking app needs about 60% adoption to be effective. This figure isn’t a guess - it’s based on on-going trials.
    The Apple/Google thing hasn't been tried, and those numbers quoted haven't been verified; so at the end of the day we don't know anything until this whole thing actually has been tried.

    That's it, no ifs or buts about it.

    This is on its way, it has good teams supporting/developing it, and it has a decent chance of actually being used by privacy-aware people; so the "I want to have a voice because I think I'm important"-people should get the f*ck out of the way and stop delaying the implementations from actually being tested IRL.
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 31 of 98
    Developers can't even get the SDK to look at or test in your their own apps unless they are in some way affiliated with the government. There could be all kinds of security holes and privacy issues with the SDK but we will never know because only people who have a vested interest in keeping them secret will be able to review it.
    edited May 2020
  • Reply 32 of 98
    svanstromsvanstrom Posts: 702member
    Developers can't even get the SDK to look at or test in your own app unless they are in some way affiliated with the government. There could be all kinds of security holes and privacy issues with the SDK but we will never know because only people who have a vested interest in keeping them secret will be able to review it.
    Don't be stupid/paranoid; there are A LOT of commercial SDKs used to develop the apps used in your phone, and basically no one has taken a proper look at most of them. And most likely most of what runs on your phone is based on code few people have access to.

    Just like with your whole damn phone (which probs is an iPhone, with this being an Apple forum and all) you trust Apple to get their stuff right, and implement it as they've told you that they've implemented it.
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 33 of 98
    rotateleftbyterotateleftbyte Posts: 1,630member
    longpath said:
    The sad thing is that the arguments being made in favor of dispensing with privacy protection parallel arguments used by German National Socialists in the 1930s & ‘40. The phrase, which became a slogan, translates roughly as “It’s for your safety.” I would vastly prefer an API with privacy protection as a core focus to the Microsoft venture that Connecticut announced they will be using.
    The 'It's for your safety" slogan has morphed into phrases like "in the interests of your safety and security" especially since 11th Sept 2001.

    DAalsethinTIMidator
  • Reply 34 of 98
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,584member
    xbit said:
    svanstrom said:

    As far as the new API being next to useless… well… at least people on the Apple-side of the isle are quite good at keeping their phones updated, and the app could simply launch a huge "push here to update your phone to a compatible level"-button if it isn't. So no need to call it "next to useless" before actually tried; because it could be just that level of extra needed to "flatten the curve" just right.
    Any COVID tracking app needs about 60% adoption to be effective. This figure isn’t a guess - it’s based on on-going trials.

    That means that the app needs to run on as wide a range of devices as possible as a considerable number of people will refuse to install it. Something that only runs on iOS 13.5 and Android 11.
    Where did you read Android 11 is required? AFAIK you are incorrect. 

    I believe the Apple/Google Covid tracing will work on any Android phone running ver, 6.0 (Marshmallow) or higher, which means essentially every Google Android phone currently in use. Google Play Services makes it possible since Google designed it to separate essential updates from the OS version itself. Apple doesn't (yet?) have something similar so the latest OS version is probably needed.  
    edited May 2020 randominternetperson
  • Reply 35 of 98
    jony0jony0 Posts: 380member
    As mentioned in the article, only 14 days worth of anonymized data is on the phone and only sent if the user opts in. I would have no problem that they include location, it can't be traced to you anyway and it could be useful for mapping hot spots so that they could apply more security measures, and yes, which could include a bit more surveillance. This is a nasty contagious pathogen the likes that have never been seen.
  • Reply 36 of 98
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    jcs2305 said:
    Unless it was your life saved, or a person you cared very much about. Then there would be no mention of silliness.  🤦‍♂️ 
    No, no single life is worth shutting down the entire country for. That is pure insanity.
    georgie01blurpbleepbloopmike1christophbentropysinTIMidator
  • Reply 37 of 98
    jony0jony0 Posts: 380member
    And why don't they just refer to the Apple Google Exposure Notification as the acronym, AGEN. They could append a T for Telephone to be cute and have it roll off the tongue, but it would certainly crank up the creepy factor and take a hit on adoption.
  • Reply 38 of 98
    svanstromsvanstrom Posts: 702member
    jony0 said:
    As mentioned in the article, only 14 days worth of anonymized data is on the phone and only sent if the user opts in. I would have no problem that they include location, it can't be traced to you anyway and it could be useful for mapping hot spots so that they could apply more security measures, and yes, which could include a bit more surveillance. This is a nasty contagious pathogen the likes that have never been seen.
    Never been seen?

    For starters… There’s the Spanish flu.
  • Reply 39 of 98
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    If all the gathered information is stored on-device, then I don't have a problem with also storing the location of where I was close to the people.  I can see that it would be useful to have that personally, and also to pass that information on to doctors in case it was a relatively crowded place and might be of particular concern.
    command_f
  • Reply 40 of 98
    dutchlord said:
    No way I am going to use any covid app. I don’t trust any of the parties involved. 
    Then why bother being plugged in? You lose your privacy the moment you connect to the internet. Someone is always watching what you’re doing and selling the information to someone else. Operating systems, ad trackers, internet service providers, cell carriers, even certain VPN providers track what you do. You’re not “safe” anywhere so you might as well unplug and go live with the Amish.
    command_f
Sign In or Register to comment.