The App That Tracks Who's Tracking You 52
Daniel_Stuckey writes "It's no secret that apps like maps or local weather know your current location, and you're probably cool with that because you want to use the handy services they provide in exchange. But chances are there are many other apps on your phone, anything from dictionaries to games, that are also geolocating your every move without your knowledge or permission. Now researchers are developing a new app to police these smartphone spies, by tracking which apps are secretly tracking you, and warning you about it.
Before your eyes glaze over at the mention of yet another privacy tool, it's worth noting that this new app is the first to be able to provide this line of defense between snooping apps and smartphone users for Android phones. Android's operating system is engineered not to allow apps to access information about other apps. But a team at Rutgers University found a way around that, by leveraging a function of Android's API to send a signal whenever an app requests location information from the operating system. MIT Technology Review reported on the research today."
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Allow blocking (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Google removed the api, but not because it was something they wanted to prevent.
The API was done in a hackish way that could cause more security issues than it solved.
I expect Google will install an after-the-fact fined grained permissions control in a future Android versions, that will allow you to turn off access for apps that are permission greedy. If you prevent access to some information, an installed app may fail, but that is preferable to the blanket installation time approval system we have today.
Re: (Score:1)
Google's motives for removing fine-grained permission are all speculative at this point. Some argue that Google removed permission control because they don't want a user backlash against "broken apps" and don't want to slow down their marketshare growth.
I would counter that argument with those developers should get flooded with broken app messages so they can re-design their apps to still function or quit altogether if a given permission was not available to it. E.g. The shady Dictionary App should still wo
Re: (Score:1)
The version that was implemented DID break apps. Even the version in Cyanogen breaks apps, and does so in a way which generates cryptic error messages. It ISN'T ready for release to a non-technical audience.
And sure, YOU may want users to get "flooded with broken app messages", but no company that wants to sell phones does.
Re: (Score:1)
This app has been available since Android 2.1 or earlier, and needs root access of course:
http://www.appbrain.com/app/pe... [appbrain.com]
Google has had years to implement user-chosen permissions revocation. Even hidden in Developer Tools under Settings would have at least given app developers the chance to test their apps against losing permissions.
Re: (Score:2)
They said clearly that they were developing the permissions manager,
no (afar as app opss is concerned). Read Dianne Hackborn's comments in here :
https://plus.google.com/+Danny... [google.com]
Re:Allow blocking (Score:5, Interesting)
The app should allow blocking of certain apps access to gps or whatever system they are trying to access. If my dictionary app is accessing my gps then allow me to block that app from using it.
You probably want lying rather than blocking... The arms race between you and the hostile dev is over pretty quickly if you block (plus, naive applications that just assume they have the permissions they requested on install will probably crash right, left, and center, which is their fault; but your problem). Lying, by contrast, is unlikely to be 100% bulletproof against a good data-miner; but 'well-formed and plausible' is certainly much, much, harder to notice and respond to with certainty than being blocked is.
Re: (Score:3)
social research, not app development (Score:5, Informative)
Briefly reading TFA, these guys are analyzing people's reactions to various privacy-warning user interface options. Their baby app that heuristically monitors location-api usage is far less capable than xprivacy or its kin of android tools.
Re: (Score:3)
People underestimate how potent aggregated privacy compromises are, and they are (even when trying to cover their tracks) pretty easy to 's
Giant external storage security hole patched? (Score:2)
I can't find any good information on this either way, but in the past any Android app could read anything stored on external media - and some apps are stored to external media, meaning that any application could monitor them.
Is that still the case? Or do apps not have full read permissions on external media in Android if they are granted permission to access it?
Also on a side note it seems like if you grant an app permission to read SMS messages it could also monitor at least that activity...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's good to know, I can't believe that existed until 4.4.2...
Hopefully there is no new permission that would let the "file browsers" work again!
App Ops does that already (Score:2, Informative)
Despite Google yanking App Ops out of Kit Kat in the latest update, you can still put it back in [howtogeek.com].
No need for Angry Birds to have access to your information. Simply limit what it can access and forget it.
Patching a hole with a hole... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a way for an app to discover and report on what other apps are doing? FAN-BLOODY-TASTIC! Because THAT'S not a security hole at all!
None of this impacts NSA metadata (Score:2)
The actual metadata is collected at, or near, the source, they only download app "fixes" when you're actively being pursued.
So, this will give a false sense of security to the 99.9 percent of American citizens who are being tracked by the NSA in an Unconstitutional and Illegal manner.
Oh, and we know exactly where you are even when you turn off location services, btw.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, there's actually some additional mil band GPS info that gets you closer, but you need special sensors and circuits for that.
Basically, we always give you our old stuff.
Re:Pffff that's nothing... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Gump My phone is plugged in here. Now this mother-fucking trace buster is gonna keep that mother-fucker from uh... tracin' our shit you know what I'm sayin'? And not only does this trace buster keep our buster from tracin' your call but it can also uh... uh... trace the mother-fucker that's tracin' your shit!
Cisco All right, so what if they have a trace buster too?
Gump Yo yo yo, that's why I gots this Trace Buster BUSTER. See, when the mother-fucker tries to bust your trace with a tr
Android's policy (Score:1)
Or maybe, Android could deny approval of applications that try to seek location data for applications that have no location based function. Data mongering fuckers.
Re:Android's policy (Score:5, Informative)
Android doesn't already have this? I mean, iOS has been asking about location usage for ages, and has an option to disable location services for individual apps for a while now. (An interesting side effect is that access to stored photos ALSO brings up the location services question as photos may have geotags in them - so apps can't get around it by snapping photos and reading out the geotag information).
And anyhow, you can always turn off location services on Android to keep apps from getting your location information.
OTOH, one has to consider that to Google, Android is really there to prevent Apple from locking Google out of mobile advertising. It's why Google acquired Android and why they made it open-source. Google knows mobiles would be a big part of it (and mobile traffic is roughly 2:1 iOS:Android), and that Apple could easily strangle Google in this field, hence, Android.
So perhaps it's all by design - Google's not wanting to give up mobile advertising. Sure they'll probably toss a bone or two - just enough to hobble mobile advertising competitors, but not Google's own advertising networks...
Re: (Score:3)
Or maybe, Android could deny approval of applications that try to seek location data for applications that have no location based function. Data mongering fuckers.
Didn't think there was any approval process in Android. So you install an app, it may tell you that it wants your location data, and if you say "no" it won't work. Your choice of giving up your location or not using the app. Minor case of blackmail. That's where the "walled garden" approach comes handy. If your app needs location data for no good reason then it doesn't get on the store. If it refuses to perform functions that don't need location data, when the user refuses to allow access to location, it do
Let me see if I understand this right... (Score:5, Funny)
Turtles? (Score:4, Funny)
It's trackers all the way down.
Made to order for this meme.... (Score:2)
"Yo, dawg! I heard you like....
Nah, it's just to easy.
What's wrong with this picture?
How much time do you have? How long is your attention span? Did you bring food?(this could take a long time)
I guessed you were asking a rhetorical question and already know some/most of the answers, so I did not elaborate.
If that was a serious question, reply back and I will try my best for you; if not, just ignore my stirring of the puddle. :-)
Re: (Score:3)
There is nothing wrong with this picture. Monopolizing a hole has been a successful evolutionary strategy for millions of years.
So does 'Lightbeam' (in a browser), but .. (Score:3)
.. if you go hastefully through the ToS it is very easy to miss that _some_ data will be communicated to 'momma' server _anyway_, regardless of user control settings, and that they reserve the right to do basically whatever they want with it.
Their stated intentions for the collected data, should they (the company behind the addon, working with Mozilla for the time being) not be acquired, go bankrupt or 'experience corporate restructuring', is to produce a public internet map with it to show which megacorp is connected to which other megacorp- but there is no link or even a timeline for that, and they are not really clear as to what data they will make public, how, when and where.
I have my doubts for them, as I do for this app.
Re: (Score:2)
Lightbeam data is only sent if the user chooses to do so.
This. You have just proven my point.
Go read their ToS again, but this time actually read it. You may also want to actually read my post to which you replied.
Ok so... (Score:1)
To the best of my knowledge Android doesn't allow you to set specific permissions on the app, only to agree or disagree. (on my Nexus 7 2nd Gen)
Android, if they allow the app, will release a patch to stop the "exploit" it's using.
They also don't allow you to access attached USB storage without rooting or other "work around" apps.
There's a reason for this.
Privacy Guard (Score:1)
Privacy Guard blocks location access to whatever apps it is enabled for.
Generally though, I examine the permissions an app requests _before_ I install it, and if it wants permissions it doesn't need, I don't install it in the first place.
For Android Devs (Score:3)
Immediately after reading the summary, I suspected this would just use "getLastKnownLocation" and correlate that with the foreground app. From searching through TFA, that is indeed the case. Technically, not very interesting at all.
A more apropos app (Score:1)
Maybe don't install a zillion apps? (Score:1)
Oh I dunno, my Galaxy becomes unstable enough with an average sized suite of apps. I can't see how adding more to tell you about the status of the status is really going to help.