Slashdot Mirror
Police Are Filing Warrants For Android's Vast Store Of Location Data (theverge.com)
The Verge is reporting about a man who robbed a Bank of America office in Romana, California. A person, named Timothy Graham, matching his profile robbed another bank in November. The investigators, however, didn't have enough evidence to prove that Graham was indeed the same person who robbed the other bank as well. The cops contacted Google and utilised a feature of Maps that builds a comprehensive history of where a user has been -- information that is proved valuable to police and advertisers alike. The publication claims that in the past few months, police have used this Maps' feature in several other instances as well. From the report: Investigators had already gone to Graham's wireless carrier, AT&T, but Google's data was more precise, potentially placing Graham inside the bank at the time the robbery was taking place. "Based on my training and experience and in consultation with other agents," an investigator wrote, "I believe it is likely that Google can provide me with GPS data, cell site information and Wi-fi access points for Graham's phone." [...] It's not clear whether either of the public warrants were filled. No Google-based evidence was presented in Graham's trial, and the other suspect plead guilty before a full case could be presented. Still, there's no evidence of a legal challenge to either warrant. There's also reason to think the investigators' legal tactic would have been successful, since Google's policy is to comply with lawful warrants for location data. While the warrants are still rare, police appear to be catching on to the powerful new tactic, which allows them to collect a wealth of information on the movements and activities of Android users, available as soon as there's probable cause to search.
Richard Stallman has always maintained that our mobile phones are tracking devices. He famously refuses to carry one.
So in a way, this is old news. However, the police and government tracking has gotten a lot better over the years.
You don't have to be using maps. Location data is used for all sorts of behind the scenes functionality (updating Google Now, Showing Android Pay cards for store locations you're in, etc.).
Everywhere you've been if you have Location History turned on:
https://www.google.com/maps/ti...
Why is this a surprise to anyone? Why would a company that is at its heart a targeted advertising company that collects vast amounts of information on you, records web searches, records web sites visited, scans your emails, collects location data, photographs your home and business front and back that faces a road, etc ... not be expected to be an incredible resource to law enforcement just as they are an incredible resource to advertisers. Sure the advertisers don't get your name or IP but advertisers don't have judges available to tell the company to provide such personally identifiable info.
Google practices a two sided market strategy. On one side they offer free services (search, email, maps, etc) to users in return for collecting info. On the other side they monetize that info through targeted advertising, delivering ads. They do not provide personally identifiable information to advertisers because that would destroy their business model, they need to be the gatekeeper between advertisers and users so they can collect their fee.
If ever the phrase "users are the product not the customer" ever applied it applies to Google. But hey, they have a friendly motto "do no evil", and they are not a three letter government agency so its all OK right?