Slashdot Mirror


The Hidden Security Risk of Geotags

pickens writes "The NY Times reports that security experts and privacy advocates have begun warning consumers about the potential dangers of geotags, which are embedded in photos and videos taken with GPS-equipped smartphones and digital cameras. By looking at geotags of uploaded photos, 'you can easily find out where people live, what kind of things they have in their house and also when they are going to be away,' says one security expert. Because the location data is not visible to the casual viewer, the concern is that many people may not realize it is there; and they could be compromising their privacy, if not their safety, when they post geotagged media online."

28 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. This is why... by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why upload services should simply just strip out the un-needed info of the pictures. The original pictures still have the sometimes useful geolocation data, but your Facebook pictures won't.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:This is why... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      After selling it to their advertising partners, of course...

    2. Re:This is why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why people shouldn't be so casual about publishing every detail of their personal life for the world to see. These micro-celebrity wannabes should wake up and recognize that their lack of privacy makes them easy targets.

    3. Re:This is why... by BitterOak · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is why upload services should simply just strip out the un-needed info of the pictures. The original pictures still have the sometimes useful geolocation data, but your Facebook pictures won't.

      But is it wise to be trusting your services (i.e. Facebook) to take these extra steps to protect your privacy? Wouldn't it make more sense to have an educated consumer base who can be careful what they upload in the first place? At the very least, the value of this information to marketers would make it unlikely that free, online services like Facebook would simply throw this valuable data away. It would make more sense for consumer electronic devices to do a better job of informing the user of what information is "hidden" in the media files they create, with a default off option for anything "hidden".

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    4. Re:This is why... by odies · · Score: 4, Informative

      I always use IrfanView to pre-process my pictures before uploading them anywhere. You need to do that anyway (original pictures are usually huge 4000+ pixels wide and forums usually limit you to less than 1280px). When you're saving the image, it shows check boxes to remove all extra information from the pictures (usually camera model and shooting options and so on). Easy. And yeah, it's an awesome and light image viewer and you can edit images too.

    5. Re:This is why... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While I agree with you, some metadata problems are much more subtle and insidious.

      How many of you have ever written "my boss is an idiot" on a word document at work, as a joke, then erased it?

      Better hope your boss isn't savvy.

      Which is why I believe that any Joe-user program which processes documents or media should offer a checkbox and.or dialog explantion offering the user to strip the metadata from saved documents or media. Before any of you say, "stripping is already available", keep in mind how many co-workers don't even know what cookies are.

    6. Re:This is why... by farnsworth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      After selling it to their advertising partners, of course...

      Seems kinda pointless. I already get pretty damned accurate location-specific ads, presumably by just looking at my ip. When I connect to my employer's VPN, I get ads for things in the region that that data center is in...

      Would knowing, say, that the majority of interior shots (probably my home) are on one particular city block vs another really be worth that much more to an advertiser?

      --

      There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.

    7. Re:This is why... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Before any of you say, "stripping is already available", keep in mind how many co-workers don't even know what cookies are.

      You insensitive clod! My coworkers are all CS grad students.

      Seriously though, they don't take any steps to strip metadata, even though it is well within their technical ability to do so, and even though they are generally aware of the risks.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    8. Re:This is why... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Depending on how economically striated the city is, possibly, possibly not.

      I'd assume that they are more interested in pictures taken out and about. Where do you vacation, dine out, meet up with friends, etc?

      As you say, IP geolocation does a pretty decent job for wired connections(I don't know whether wireless carriers will sell out customer locations, and, if so, what the price is); but people take a lot of photos, possibly the majority, away from their primary wired ISP.

    9. Re:This is why... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Would knowing, say, that the majority of interior shots (probably my home) are on one particular city block vs another really be worth that much more to an advertiser?

      Yes. They can correlate it with property records and figure out who you are, what bank you have your mortgage with, how much you paid for your house, when you bought it, your likely income level, if you are married (more than one name on the mortgage) and that's just from the primary property records search in some states. Start cross-referencing it with other databases and my guess is that you'll have no secrets at all.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  2. Re:I was just wondering about that by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Might want to take a look at jhead. jhead -purejpg will, as the name suggests, strip everything that isn't actually the image.

  3. The Hidden Danger of Post Marks on Letters by Palestrina · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OMG, letters have post marks and tell what town the sender lives in!

    OMG, caller ID gives my phone number to people that I call!

    OMG, the Registry of Deeds lists my address and how much I paid for the house!

    OMG, the phone book list my name, phone number and address!

    We've been dealing with stuff like this for decades, right? I think the danger is more about the contents of your tweets ("I am on vacation") than the metadata ("I live here"). I can probably find your address if I wanted, even without Flickr metadata.

    Of course, metadata can lie as well. Maybe I want to say, "I have a big coin collection" in Twitter and put photos of it all over the place on the web, but with false geotag data to make it look like it came from someone else's home. Because of that risk, even those who do not use Twitter, or the iPhone or Flickr are also at risk. Gee. maybe we should just lock our doors at night.

    1. Re:The Hidden Danger of Post Marks on Letters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      iPhones contain the long/lat of the place where the picture was taken. That's a little bit more than "letters have post marks and tell what town the sender lives in!". Don't be naive. Look at the Sherlock Holmes shit that 4chan does *regularly* with things such as EXIF data.

      There was a famous thread on there once where a 30 year old guy was professing how much he wanted to sleep with his 16 year old niece's friend. Using nothing but the emblem of her school mascot on the front, 4chan tracked HIM down and had a field day.

    2. Re:The Hidden Danger of Post Marks on Letters by grumbel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that it allows correlation. Have two pseudonyms on the net that you use to post pictures? Now suddenly people can easily track you down by your GPS coordinates or better yet, the serial number of your camera or whatever other unique information one can grab from the metadata.

    3. Re:The Hidden Danger of Post Marks on Letters by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OMG, letters have post marks and tell what town the sender lives in!

      You believe that having a creep know the town you live in is the same as the creep knowing your GPS coordinates?

      No, we haven't been "dealing with stuff like this for decades", because until recently corporations have not had the capacity to have such persistent and precise data about you that they could monetize.

      That picture of your 8 year old daughters that you put on the Internet has data that somebody will sell to the highest bidder, and I doubt they're going to make sure the highest bidder isn't a registered sex offender. I'm usually very suspicious of these kind of "consider the children" appeals, but the personal minutiae that is being commoditized by businesses has reached a point where it's going to be very hard to roll back.

      You've got one of the biggest corporations in the world collecting very private information, selling it to the highest bidder and then getting into bed with the most repressive regimes on Earth and at the same time forming "strategic alliances" with other huge corporations to subvert the effective net "neutrality":that has been in place since the beginning. And Palestrina thinks that's the same as having your name and number voluntarily listed in the phone book. And his rationalization is that it's OK because if you know what you're doing you can falsify your metadata. Don't you see the problem here?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  4. Geotags and a WHOLE lot more by xiando · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead is a nice Exif Jpeg camera setting parser and thumbnail remover. Try it and get scared. Geotags are new, but the problem has been there for years. The "hidden" parts of images give away camera model, camera time, camera serial number and that is just the tip of the iceberg. Always open and save images in some editor such as GIMP before uploading them to the Internet(s). This is a good idea anwyay as viewers will generally be more happy if you crop the picture, perhaps adjust the color balance etc.

  5. Help! by TyFoN · · Score: 4, Funny

    Help, they can see me going into my house!
    They will know where i live..
    WHERE IS MY TIN FOIL HAT?!?!

  6. Easy solution by awtbfb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't post media on unprotected pages. No big loss behind this step. Friends and family can handle a simple user/password combination - we've been doing this for years. Trust me, the rest of the world doesn't really want to see your pictures of the kids at their friend Joey's birthday party.

  7. Pictures can tell the future? by volfreak · · Score: 3, Funny

    OP states "By looking at geotags of uploaded photos, 'you can easily find out where people live, what kind of things they have in their house and also when they are going to be away,'..." How can uploaded photos tell someone when I am going to be away? Can pictures now show us what we'll be seeing and where at some point in time in the future? Neat... So, what setting do I use for my DSLR to get it to show me where I'll be going and when I'll be away? I want to see what's ahead of me.... Maybe it can show that I am currently away but how can it show when I'm going to be... anything? Oh, now I get it... I should take a picture of my airline tickets or hotel booking and post those on line... Yeah, that's how they'll know....

    1. Re:Pictures can tell the future? by horatio · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You make a good point. If I'm going to break into someone's house, a good time to do it would probably be between 9am and 5pm Monday-Friday. Most thefts are crimes of opportunity, not premeditated Oceans-Eleven style. I could just sit out in front of their house in the morning and wait for them to leave for work. No pictures or geotags needed. With a just a couple of guys, I can clean the place out in about 10-15 minutes. Where I live, assuming someone notices and phones the cops, that is about twice the time needed before dispatch will finally put the call through to officers.

      Took the cops more than an hour to show up for a suspicious person sitting in his car one morning doing what appeared to be casing a house in my neighborhood. More recently, took them 30 minutes to show up after a call about a man banging on the neighbor's door, yelling and threatening to kick it in.

      The most effective deterrent is one of those 'ADT' type stickers. After that, the dog. If that doesn't work, a double-tap to the center of mass should end things rather abruptly.

      --
      There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.
  8. Re:I was just wondering about that by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Informative

    Or, you can just use ImageMagick:

    $ mogrify -strip image.jpg

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  9. Re:ImageMagick and remove metadata by MechaStreisand · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yup, and it recompresses the image when you do so. See suggestions here for ways of stripping it without recompressing.

    --
    Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
  10. Dangers to rare speciesand historical sites by jo7hs2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Potential security issues aside, geotags have always concerned me with the potential for unintended consequences. As someone with a passion for both native orchids and other rare life forms, along with history, I'm always concerned how an innocent snapshot by someone using geotagging might provide detailed location data to a poacher or pothunter. I've already seen a few plant populations decimated by a mere Flickr post, and I know I've seen geotags for the same species at other locations. I think it is a feature that should be disabled by default and used only with caution.

  11. People need to learn to wash their hands first by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I actually mean that literally. We go on and on about various privacy risks and on and on about how stupid "average people are" when there are some obvious patterns of behavior outside of computing/networking that shed some real light on where the problems originate.

    People simply don't understand the world they live in. They don't understand their cars, their food (c'mon diet coke? really? that nutrasweet that slows your metabolism?) or just about anything? They might think they know some things but not really understand them and nor do they really care to. The people get "flu shots" every year not knowing what strains of influenza are actually being covered by this year's flu-shot-du-jour... they just expect "the experts" to know and to do what they are told.

    So who are these experts that the masses follow? Whoever claims to be. The dairy council, for example (you know, the guys who make their living selling dairy products?) tell us every year to drink even more milk than last year. And Microsoft, the company who helped to make "computer virus" a household word and cares more about selling the same thing over and over again instead of redesigning an OS that is both easy and secure. And a lot more. The people who have the most to gain by people being stupid are the "experts." And of course, questioning is something that is beaten out of us by the time we get through the first years of public school so there's no chance of a renaissance happening any time soon... at least not without a dark ages preceding it.

    The problem is much, much larger than just being aware of meta-data in a picture. And yes, I agree with some here who suggest that "these online services should really have our backs" on this sort of thing, but it's not really in their interests to do so... so why would they?

  12. That photo looks too good. I call BS. by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Gimp has an exif option, I have not used it.

    But if you take a photo for Wikimedia Commons and strip the Exif, and your photography skill looks professional, some regular might assume that you are fraudulently claiming copyright ownership of some other photographer's all-rights-reserved images. Preserving your camera's Exif data tends to shift the burden of proof to whoever is calling bullshit.

  13. This is odd by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    It seems that quite a few geotags on the porn I download are at my house. The time stamps are when I'm at work.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  14. Conditions apply by jrumney · · Score: 3, Funny

    By looking at geotags of uploaded photos, 'you can easily find out where people live, what kind of things they have in their house and also when they are going to be away,*'

    [*] Separate purchase of time machine required for viewing geotags on photographs from the future.

  15. Masterminds by Cruciform · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's a pretty big site dedicated to the growing of marijuana, where the users post pictures of their grow operations from behind the "protection" of proxies.
    Just for kicks one day I started checking their pictures. About 20 to 25 percent of them were geotagged. Some of those grows had hundreds, if not thousands of plants. So much for hiding behind a proxy. :)