Shopping Centers Track Customers Via Cell Phone Signals

oschobero writes "According an article from the Times, customers in shopping centers are having their every move tracked. Using cellphone signals, the system can tell when people enter the center, how long they stay in a particular shop, and what route each customer takes. The system works by monitoring the signals produced by mobile handsets and then locating the phone by triangulation." The particular tracking device described by the article is made by an English company called Path Intelligence.

Re:Turn off the phone?

[Anonymous Coward]

ask Hans Reiser about that

People WANT this stuff, they just don't know it

[religious freak]

Whenever I read big-brother type stuff like this, I'm reminded of one of the best lectures I received regarding the direction of IT (and this was years ago)

In speaking about GIS he outlined some items that seemed very spooky and seemingly improbable things that would happen - then he discussed the results of those things occurring as if they were a given. I was skeptical that they'd even happen, but they are beginning to... stuff like this article mentions, how it will be very close to impossible to travel without a cell phone, and how that would essentially mark you (not in the crazy 666 sense) for all kinds of crap people want to sell to you.

At the end, his point was that these types of things will be reviled in name only, but once people receive the benefits of the technology, they'll love it. We're headed down this path whether we like it or not; privacy will become a very relative thing in the next couple decades. We will need to rely exclusively on the good faith of the companies that guard our information.

Re:Turn off the phone?

[coren2000]

That would defeat the purpose of a cellphone.

Re:Walk randomly.

[maxwell demon]

There's no need to use a signal jammer. It's your very own phone. Maybe you've never heard of that concept, but mobile phones tend to have an option which has about the same effect on your own phone phone as a jammer, but without disturbing other people's phones: Just switch your phone off! As an added bonus, you'll also increase the battery life of your phone.

Towards the Transparent Society

[argent]

Other things these systems could do include correlating phone IDs with missing big-ticket merchandise to identify possible shoplifters, or look for suspicious activity like repeated visits to rest rooms or other semi-private places by the same set of IDs. Combine it with video records and credit card records and you can get a fair amount of visitor identification without going to the phone company for tracing. Not enough to act, but enough to be useful to security personnel.

It's another step towards Brin's transparent society.

Tracking information

[wfstanle]

I don't have objections to it being done correctly. By correctly I would want the following issues to be addressed. 1. No attempts to find out who the cell phone belongs to. (No personally identifiable information). 2. The id number that the cell phone transmits is never stored in any way. The use of an internal identifying number would be acceptable as long as no link was made between the actual cell phone identification number and the internal id number is stored. 3. Every time you visit the mall you get a new internal id number. This would prevent getting information about repeat visits to the mall. My concerns about storing personally identifiable information stems from the government. The government would subpoena for the mall owners cell phone information and all sorts of fun would begin. Even if only a cell phone id number is stored it would be enough for the government to use as a starting point.

Re:Hello John Anderton

[Z00L00K]

Just consider that this is a possible privacy violation.

What can be worse is if the cash register matches your phone with your purchase and re-uses that next time you approaches the shop which can make them to play an ad on a screen "Special Offer to Mr. Jones; 10-pack of Strawberry taste condoms" when you approach that store with a wife/girlfriend allergic to latex.

Re:It Does Run Linux!

[QX-Mat]

first thing I thought... back then I thought WOW innovation, the hardware DMCA does suck.

and I still do! it's a great piece of tech.

If you don't want to be tracked in public, stop emitting a signal.

Matt

Re:Hello John Anderton

[vux984]

If marketers can figure out how to get the right message across to the right people at the right time, its pretty much a win-win for everyone.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

As a marketer of profoundly useless products, that generally barely work, and are universally of low quality, I would like to know which people are the biggest suckers and what time they are most vulnerable to making a purchase of one of my many products.

I make items such as tiger wards, rocks with googly eyes, q-ray bracelets, nordic-trac exercise equipment, gold-making guides for mmorpgs that I copied from web posts and the manual, sea monkeys, evidence eliminator software for your PC, and many other fine products I'm sure you've seen in countless ads. Frankly I'm amazed I sell any at all. But thanks to the miracles of marketing, I am able to connect with people who need these products. People looking to trade their hard earned cash...aw hell, some of them even put it on already racked up credit cards and go into debt for this stuff, that's how badly they need it!!

I couldn't agree more that further imroving the my sales is win-win for everyone.

Re:it's not unnecessary

[russotto]

A cellphone which is turned off cannot be used to listen in on private conversations. The RF section is off (and you can verify this with a simple ammeter; the RF section draws significant power). Unless, of course, the FBI/CIA/NSA/MI5 has switched your cellphone out for a specially modified one which doesn't actually turn off.

you need to read the other comments here

[ClioCJS]

Specifically the ones that mention cellphone memory and how conversations can be recorded to that prior to upload NEXT TIME you turn it on.

You also need to read the news.com news article linked to from other comments here. The FBI was pretty clear in its statements.

Thank you for providing the counter-example of a swapped out cellphone -- that'd a good point. But I think they don't even need to do THAT.

And an iphone is not turned off when it's turned off -- Go read the slashdot article about the guy who got a $5000 bill when it was "turned off" while on a cruise. It still checks your email, it still transfers data. I could be wrong -- I don't have an iphone. Or a cellphone. I'm not an expert. But I do rememeber what I've read that makes me NOT want to get one.

Re:Turn off the phone?

[kesuki]

ask Hans Reiser about that

the government being able to track (or remotely turn a phone on, for surveillance) has nothing to do with the cell phone monitoring system set up in malls.

the system set up in malls will only activate if the phone is turned on and sending and receiving signals from the local tower.

In Hans Reisers case, he removed the batteries to avoid a 'feature' in modern cell phones whereby a phone in 'off' mode can be remotely powered up by a broad cast signal sent from all nearby cell towers, to only the specific serial number of the phone trying to be remotely activated.

but the evidence was found anyways, he really should have sunk the evidence in a body of water too deep to be located from, like the pacific ocean in a container that would sink, and never decay in his own lifetime...

if you're going to ditch evidence do it better than Hans Reiser.

Pay me!!!

[wikinerd]

Everyone thinks of this story in terms of privacy but no one thinks of it in financial terms: My shop usage data have great financial value (otherwise the shops wouldn't pay to install surveillance systems) and the shop's surveillance is involuntary - I am not given a choice whether to allow them track me or not, except if I avoid transmitting wireless signals while near their shop. As the data collection is not voluntary and my shop usage data have financial value, I demand payment from shops using this system. I want a share of my shop usage data's financial value.

Re:it's not unnecessary

[jonfr]

When a phone is off, it's off. No signal, nothing. If the CIA was listening and no call was being made, the phone it self was bugged (you know, spy gear and stuff). Not because they where listening on the person while the phone was off.

Sometimes CNN is wrong or lies, choose one.

Re:Why this isn't likely to apply in the US

[Peter Simpson]

Well, there's CDMA2000 and whatever competes with it (WCDMA?), iDEN (Nextel), WiDEN, PCS, all of which are in common use in the US (I think Sprint is already CDMA2000). Analog and TDMA are dead in the US. None of them use IMEI, but they all have some kind of equipment serial number you could track. iDEN is proprietary, so you might have a patent issue there.

T-Mobile uses only GSM 900, 1800 and 1900 in the US, never 800. So, they'd need to cover all four frequency bands and all the current and near-future protocols.

I still maintain it's not practical to be doing TDOA tracking on all handsets in a medium to large size mall. Aside from multipath issues, everyone of the thousand or so people in a mall has their own handset, there's the regulatory aspect of this. It's illegal in the US to monitor the cellular bands, and this includes the data and control channels. The company would need to apply for permission from the FCC, and that would open up the debate.

Re:warning sigs at doors

[kesuki]

But the signal isn't public. The frequency is privately owned by the cell companies.

The frequency is Leased, not owned. but thats not the only thing wrong, the signal they are 'receiving' is 'sent in the clear' eg: devices that listen for that signal are not illegal, there does come some question on if they can 'sell' the data collected, or even use it practically...

but there is nothing illegal about receiving the signal. if you have a problem with it, bring it up with your cell phone company for transmitting the Id of your phone in the clear, so anyone can tell who's phone is sending a signal...

Re:it's not unnecessary

[Thaelon]

The UK and USA governments have both used cellphones to listen in on private conversations WHILE A CALL WAS NOT BEING MADE. Even CNN verifies this. Basically -- taking the battery out IS necessary if you want true privacy with NO chance of interference. And that's just one of many reasons why I would never get the piece of crap called the iPhone.

I would totally trust sensational news from a source that makes money by selling advertisements (requiring high viewership).

If you think this is true enough for it to affect your behavior, do some homework first. Otherwise, treat major media companies purely as entertainment. Hell, they should all be required to carry a warning label: "For entertainment purposes only." I mean, why else would they have the doings of celebrities on there? That stuff isn't news.

Re:Hello John Anderton

[Binkleyz]

And do you seriously believe that they won't try to correlate the characteristics of your phone to the person carrying it? Really?

I'm not a cell phone tech (or even play one on tv), but I'm pretty sure that your phone # or at least the SIM# (or whatever the equivalent is for CDMA) is among the information being broadcast willy-nilly by the nice little radio in your pocket. It doesn't really take much for me to believe that the vendors in the mall will aggregate the cell phone info with their sales and come up with your name and purchase history. Hell, it would probably even be legal, since I'm sure they'd just add a line about it to the "Code of Conduct" or whatever they have hidden somewhere on the premises...

It would probably read something like (IANAL either..)

"In consideration for your admittance to this private property, you explicitly acknowledge that the management and vendors herein may capture certain information about you, and disclaim any and all recourse against the parties involved in said information gathering".

Sounds kind of like just another EULA that people will ignore whilst going about their business at the mall.

Re:it's not unnecessary

[Sledgy]

Unless you don't live in the US, which of course covers MOST people.

Re:it's not unnecessary

[drinkypoo]

4. Is it legal for shopping centers to do this? According to Southern Illinois University it's a class IV felony to record a telephone conversation without the consent of both parties in the state of Illinois.

No one is recording a telephone conversation, just triangulating its source location.

On one hand, it seems like bad form. On the other hand, you're broadcasting EM in their building and asking them not to pick it up is stupid. Finally, this will be done in every shopping mall in the world using cameras sooner or later, so who cares?