Mozilla Is Mapping Cell Towers and WiFi Access Points

First time accepted submitter neiras writes "Mozilla is building a map of publicly-observable cell tower and WiFi access points to compete with proprietary geolocation services like Google's. Coverage is a bit thin so far but is improving rapidly. Anyone with an Android phone can help by downloading the MozStumbler app and letting it run while walking or driving around. The application is also available on the F-Droid market." "Thin" is relative; it's quite a few data points since we first mentioned the pilot program a few months ago.

Comments

Re:Privacy

[FunPika]

If I recall correctly, the main thing that got Google in trouble was that they were actually intercepting information sent through unsecured access points in addition to mapping out access points in general.

Maps roads, Not Coverage

[icebike]

Its a frequent problem with these phone based mapping programs, that the coverage area they map is way too small, especially when they are mapping cell towers. They usually assume a reception circle about the width of a road. So they end up mapping roads, and frequently apply magical thinking to show no coverage areas simply because nobody walked there running their app.

They will show coverage on all sides of an open field, but unless someone walks a zigzags path thru that field they will simply assume there is no coverage there. I prefer carrier maps. Even guesswork by real radio engineers is better than spotwork by silly apps.

These mapping programs, when mapping cellular service would be better off mapping HOLES (no coverage areas) of each type (2g, 3G, LTE, CDMA, etc). The task would be smaller, and the data presentation far more useful. They would just log GPS position where there was no signal and send that when they again found a signal. Presentation would show service available until you actually had some measurements that said it wasn't.

That way at least the farmer or hunter working off road would have a more reliable idea of where there is likely cell service, and everybody would have a better idea of where they are unlikely to service.

Assuming it is all quiet in the forest when trees fall simply because you weren't standing there to hear it is a interesting philosophical exercise but a pretty stupid way to run a mapping service.

Re:Maps roads, Not Coverage

[SoftwareArtist]

I'm not sure what your point is. This isn't supposed to be a map of cell phone coverage. It's a map showing all the data points in their database. The goal of this project is to let people identify their location based on the visible networks, not to tell them what kind of network coverage they'll have in any location.

Re:Maps roads, Not Coverage

[SoftwareArtist]

I did follow the link. You're misinterpreting it. This is a data coverage map, that is, a map of how much data they have in different places. It has nothing to do with cell phone coverage.

Project is for GeoLocation NOT Cell Coverage!!

[BBF_BBF]

icebike, If you had bothered read the Mozilla Location Service Project Page, the goal of the project is to create an Open Wifi AP/Cell Tower to Geo Location Mapping Database, It's not meant to map Cell Coverage. https://location.services.mozilla.com/

This will allow the look up of rough position information without turning on the GPS using an OPEN DATABASE. The same thing that a few PROPRIETARY databases do currently.

Given this goal, road coverage is good enough.

Re:Privacy

[tlhIngan]

What's the point of this?

Actually, it's to... provide an alternative locating service to GPS.

Both Apple and Google maintain a list of WiFi MAC addresses and GPS locations. In areas where there's no GPS, or GPS is extremely weak, using cell tower and MAC addresses can provide alternative location services. Or for devices without GPS hardware, it can provide location services still. E.g., if you tether a WiFi-only iPad to an iPhone, it can get your location quite accurately using the database.

Apple bought a company that maintains the database, Google built theirs up using streetview. Mozilla is probably trying to create an open-source version.

And it's that database that lead to the whole "tracking" scandal of iOS 4 - because whenever you requested a location Apple sends you a database containing locations near you as well so you can do mapping without continually asking Apple where it is. That database cache was what people said "Apple is tracking them!" Of course, it wasn't, but knowing what areas the cache covers helps in knowing where you might be. In densely populated areas with a lot of APs, Apple would send you a very narrow list that can be quite accurate to your track. In areas with more sporadic coverage, you get a bigger footprint because there's less data per square mile (Apple probably sends you a fixed number of APs to locate oneself, rather than send you all the APs within a certain radius).

So in the city, you can get down to street-level tracking. In the suburbs, well, the cache is probably only good for pinpointing to a few blocks.

Re:Privacy

[cheater512]

Completely. This just looks for the 'announcement' packets from access points. It doesn't care or do anything about the data packets.
You are intercepting data just as much as your phone does when you go to the wifi page and it shows the list of access points near by.

Google was accidentally storing all the raw data for debug purposes (which got left turned on).

Re:Privacy

[AuMatar]

Also, GPS kills batteries. A quick network lookup (or even local, since you could cache the local area's data and request new data only when you move enough) is cheap on the battery.

Re:Privacy

[foobar bazbot]

Geolocation for what though?

Say I go to google maps, or mapquest, or openstreetmap, or whatever. That web page will ask the browser to do geolocation, the browser will throw up a dialog something like this:

Website foo-maps.bar wants to know your location.
{Scare-text explaining why I might not want to click OK}
Send location data?
[Yes] [No]

If I click yes, the browser sends my location to the mapping site. Now I'm looking at a map of where I am, I can search for businesses nearby, etc.. Or, if I don't want a map of my current location, I could just click no, then I'd have to type in an address or search query to find the map I do want.

Or some ad server wants to show me banner ads for nearby stores, so it asks the browser to geolocation; the browser will throw up the same dialog, I'll click no, and the ad server doesn't get my location.

Or any other web site that might want to know my location for any reason, same story: The browser pops up a dialog, I click yes or no, and the site gets or doesn't get my current location.

It's cause you're a douche

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm just gonna throw this out here but maybe the reason it always seems that no one gives a shit about your suggestions or improvements is because you do actually talk to everyone here and treat them like they are a 3rd grader. Maybe if you didn't just immediately start tearing someone's idea apart and pointing out every little scenario of why it is garbage, then just maybe people would pay more attention. When I have a know-it-all wanna-be like you just start poppin off at the mouth, I ignore you.....kind of like a screaming 3rd grader.

For Firefox OS and Android devices w/o Google Play

[tepples]

how is mozilla going to "compete" with something that's already second to none, comes pre-installed on android handsets, and is free to use with no intrusive ads?

By making it available on Firefox OS handsets and on those Android devices that don't ship with Google Play Services, such as Kindle Fire series, several devices popular in China, and phones with CyanogenMod system software installed that don't have the Gapps.