Comment by transpute
4 years ago
Good news, the paper mentions privacy.
> We identify a number of critical issues that need to be addressed in this space... First, individuals should be provided the opportunity to opt out of SENS services – in other words, to avoid being monitored and tracked by the Wi-Fi devices around them.
Bad news, the paper proposes remote human identification by every Wi-Fi device.
> This would require the widespread introduction of reliable SENS algorithm for human or animal identification.
Would opt-in be legally easier than requiring human body scan registration for opt-out of Wi-Fi remote sensing?
This is a poison pill.
In order to not be tracked you must consent to be tracked so we know you don't want to be tracked.
This should not be done or allowed. Period. It's a huge invasion of privacy.
It would be better to have a beacon that simply broadcasts that you do not want to be tracked, with no further identifying features. There isn't really a good reason for identifying you to then look up that you don't want to be tracked. Make that legally binding and enforce it.
Or, better yet, make it totally opt in.
How would opt-in work in practice? Say, if this gets pushed out on $CAFE public wifi for analytics. Would it be something akin to "tick this consent box to use the wifi"?
And if $CAFE tracks you regardless of you not ticking the box or connecting to the network, how do I detect that as a regular customer?