Dear Android Users: Google Is Tracking You Even If You Disable Location Services

Slowly but surely, Americans have been conditioned to give up any expectations of privacy in the name of public safety and/or for simple technological conveniences.  However, there remains, even today, a tiny sliver of the population that would prefer to not have their every movement tracked no matter how antiquated that makes them look. Be that as it may, per a recent discovery from Quartz, those old-school folks better hope they haven"t been using an Android device for the past 11 months.

Many people realize that smartphones track their locations. But what if you actively turn off location services, haven’t used any apps, and haven’t even inserted a carrier SIM card?

 

Even if you take all of those precautions, phones running Android software gather data about your location and send it back to Google when they’re connected to the internet, a Quartz investigation has revealed.

 

Since the beginning of 2017, Android phones have been collecting the addresses of nearby cellular towers—even when location services are disabled—and sending that data back to Google. The result is that Google, the unit of Alphabet behind Android, has access to data about individuals’ locations and their movements that go far beyond a reasonable consumer expectation of privacy.

 

Quartz observed the data collection occur and contacted Google, which confirmed the practice.

Of course, the company that has been collecting your location data for nearly a year now without your knowledge, would like for you to know that you shouldn"t worry too much about your privacy because they can assure you the data was never "used or stored" and was only collected to help "improve the speed and performance of message delivery"....

The cell tower addresses have been included in information sent to the system Google uses to manage push notifications and messages on Android phones for the past 11 months, according to a Google spokesperson. They were never used or stored, the spokesperson said, and the company is now taking steps to end the practice after being contacted by Quartz. By the end of November, the company said, Android phones will no longer send cell-tower location data to Google, at least as part of this particular service, which consumers cannot disable.

 

“In January of this year, we began looking into using Cell ID codes as an additional signal to further improve the speed and performance of message delivery,” the Google spokesperson said in an email. “However, we never incorporated Cell ID into our network sync system, so that data was immediately discarded, and we updated it to no longer request Cell ID.”

...you know, because wireless carriers haven"t quite figured out yet how to efficiently route data streams through network nodes just yet...

It is not clear how cell-tower addresses, transmitted as a data string that identifies a specific cell tower, could have been used to improve message delivery. But the privacy implications of the covert location-sharing practice are plain. While information about a single cell tower can only offer an approximation of where a mobile device actually is, multiple towers can be used to triangulate its location to within about a quarter-mile radius, or to a more exact pinpoint in urban areas, where cell towers are closer together.

 

The practice is troubling for people who’d prefer they weren’t tracked, especially for those such as law-enforcement officials or victims of domestic abuse who turn off location services thinking they’re fully concealing their whereabouts. Although the data sent to Google is encrypted, it could potentially be sent to a third party if the phone had been compromised with spyware or other methods of hacking. Each phone has a unique ID number, with which the location data can be associated.

 

“It has pretty concerning implications,” said Bill Budington, a software engineer who works for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for digital privacy. “You can kind of envision any number of circumstances where that could be extremely sensitive information that puts a person at risk.”

 

"It is really a mystery as to why this is not optional,” said Matthew Hickey, a security expert and researcher at Hacker House, a security firm based in London. “It seems quite intrusive for Google to be collecting such information that is only relevant to carrier networks when there are no SIM card or enabled services.”

Of course, if their excuse for this gross invasion of privacy is even remotely true, then we look forward Google"s follow-up report to Android users detailing precisely how much faster their text messages are now than before...we won"t hold our breath.

Equifax Web-Page Goes Offline Amid Reports Of New Breach

Equifax has taken one of its web pages offline as its security team looks into reports of another potential cyber breach, the credit reporting company, which recently disclosed a hack that compromised the sensitive information of 145.5 million people, said on Thursday.

"We are aware of the situation identified on the equifax.com website in the credit report assistance link," Equifax spokesman Wyatt Jefferies said in an email.

"Our IT and security teams are looking into this matter, and out of an abundance of caution have temporarily taken this page offline."

As CBC reports, the move came after an independent security analyst on Wednesday found part of Equifax"s website was under the control of attackers trying to trick visitors into installing fraudulent Adobe Flash updates that could infect computers with malware, the technology news website Ars Technica reported.

When I clicked it (from Gmail on Android) I was redirected to a spam page shortly after seeing the Equifax credit file form.

I thought maybe it was an anomaly because it didn"t happen again. But after reading your article about how sometimes hacks will redirect randomly I tried the link again just now and sure enough I got a spam page again (lucksupply.club saying I won an iPhone X). This is Chrome-in-a-tab from Gmail so i don"t believe there"s any extensions or other malware on my device that could have caused this redirect.

EFX share price is tumbling...

One Statistics Professor Was Just Banned By Google: Here Is His Story

Statistics professor Salil Mehta, adjunct professor at Columbia and Georgetown who teaches probability and data science and whose work has appeared on this website on numerous prior occasions, was banned by Google on Friday.

What did Salil do to provoke Google? It is not entirely clear, however what is clear is that his repeated attempts at restoring his email, blog and other Google-linked accounts have so far been rejected with a blanket and uniform statement from the search giant.

Here is what happened, in Salil Mehta"s own words.

Don’t do a googol of evil

Freedom is not free unless corporations who exert a large influence in our lives believe in our well-being.  I am a statistics professor and understand that there needs to be reasonable standards to control a large social network and make sure everyone is able to enjoy it freely.  Invariably people disagree (we all see this), but some principles, such as simply showing probability and statistics with the sole hope of educating others, should be acceptable and in the middle of the distribution.  I am for a higher standard, and a higher purpose.  There is great care that I have taken to make sure that people treat one other well, admit faults, and present math and probability education to a wide audience.

On Friday afternoon East Coast Time by surprise, I was completely shut down in all my Google accounts (all of my gmail accounts, blog, all of my university pages that were on google sites, etc.) for no reason and no warning.  A number of us were stunned and unsure, but clearly we know at this point it wasn’t an accident.  Here are some examples commented from best-selling author Nassim Taleb, and they have been retweeted by government officials, and the NYT and WSJ journalists. 

Even his email was disabled by Google. https://t.co/Zj9g9MpKzr

— NassimNicholasTaleb (@nntaleb) August 19, 2017

      My ads-free blog itself is a probability theory site, with 27 million reads and has somewhere near 150k overall followers.     It’s been read by Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, Nobel Laureates, multiple governments, celebrity athletes around the world, deans of many universities (on the syllabi of same), and a number of TV news anchors.  So it’s been a great boon for Google to be noticed so kindly by essentially a charitable site promoting math education.  What great people from all corners of the world and at all levels who can enjoy Google, until it suddenly died Friday afternoon.

My background is clean, and without a political or social agenda.  I am not promoting any specific viewpoint.  I teach probability math and that’s it.  Have worked with both the Obama administration and advised on polling statistics for the Trump campaign, am an adjunct professor at three top universities, an editor of the peer-reviewed journal of the American Statistical Association, and wrote a best-selling statistics book (all the proceeds of which I gave to charity!) https://www.amazon.com/Statistics-Topics-Salil-Mehta/dp/1499273533

The NYT has a popular print article this weekend and they cited my Google blog, but alas it not links to an embarrassing malfunction, for many to see: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/19/business/the-stock-market-has-been-magical-it-cant-last.html

This doesn’t look good.  Now instead of mathematics, reporters have turned to this latest circus nightmare from Google as an example of how they are compounding bad decisions on good people anywhere and at any time. 

Can they not differentiate me from an evil person?  Can they not see the large and reputable people and institutions that have relied on my work?  Do they have better people who can coach them on how to make decisions with much better taste and finesse?  What’s next, all CEOs and professors and politicians are going to be shut down from social media whenever it is least expected?  Overnight hi-tech lynching squads are a thing of the past.  We can’t have kangaroo courts and hope to lead with moral authority.

There is a lot of energy being spent right now thinking about how this happens to your best customers, just like that.  Fear is running wild about who is next and on what other social media platforms.  Have used Google for 11 years with no issue.  Have driven enormous free traffic to your products and properties.  But now that’s been severely damaged as the trust/reputational value has been crushed, and I have to re-emerge quickly elsewhere and deal with this fall-out.  I have many students, family, coworkers, etc who typically send me e-mails each day and all of it is vanishing with a kicked-back “user doesn’t exist” error.  And that’s totally unacceptable.  Through my many companies have business accounts on different social media and have no issue getting a marketing line, but one needs to know who they are dealing with and not treat them this badly.  The wrongs here are not being done by me.

Again, a math site.  An academic site that you can see from the various header tabs of the archives (http://web.archive.org/web/20170518181653/http://statisticalideas.blogspot.com/2012/11/statistical-ideas-website.html).  These are applications of formulas and shouldn’t be subject of limitations of free speech.  A lot of great people like it.  Hopefully Google needs to take huge step back and reexamine what went wrong and how the product could be better for others going forward, so that they and all of us grow well.  People’s faith in democracy is on the line.  Faith that technology companies are looking out for our good first.

I have followed their common “appeal” form but no response for three days.  Also connected with one of the VPs over the weekend and it still takes time until receiving this today!  Just more of a reflection of how cold a company can treat someone very poorly: without any information, and lack of ability to move forward in their life (can I get real reasons if any, can I get advance notice, can I get my contact list back from gmail, and why are university properties unrelated to my blog shut down?) 

We are going to be looking back on this time in Google’s history and those of other social media and know that they have done some very immoral and confusing things, and it has hurt their public reputation with decent people who wanted to grow into the next future with them

DOJ Ordered To Preserve Gmail Records Of Clinton-Colluding Assistant AG Peter Kadzik

A Judicial Watch lawsuit seeking records related to potential collusion between the Justice Department and Hillary Clinton operatives during her email investigation has resulted in a federal judge issuing a rare order instructing the DOJ to preserve the Gmail records of the now infamous Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik.  The order came from U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Clinton appointee, and gave the DOJ until this morning to report back on steps taken to preserve the personal email accounts of Kadzik.  Per Politico:

"Defendant shall take all necessary and reasonable steps to ensure the preservation of all agency records and potential agency records between the dates of December 1, 2014 and November 7, 2016 in any personal email account of Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter Kadzik. Any question about whether a record is an agency record shall be resolved in favor of it being an agency record."

Of course, as we pointed out back in the fall, various emails provided by WikiLeaks exposed Kadzik repeatedly colluding with the Clinton campaign by providing campaign manager, and long-time friend, John Podesta with inside information on the DOJ"s investigation of Hillary"s email scandal.  Moreover, proving just how close they were, in a , Podesta emailed an Obama campaign official to recommend Kadzik for a supportive role in the campaign saying that Kadzik was a “fantastic lawyer” who “kept me out of jail”...now that"s a bond that lasts.

Of course, in response to Judge Sullivan"s order, the DOJ promptly noted that Mr. Kadzik was unable to locate any work-related emails on his Gmail account...well how convenient.

"It is the government’s understanding that Mr. Kadzik has located no agency records or potential agency records in his Gmail account and that, therefore, there are no such documents to preserve. Nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution and consistent with the preservation order that Judicial Watch seeks, the government has instructed Mr. Kadzik to preserve any potential agency records in his Gmail account, should any exist, and Mr. Kadzik has agreed to do so," the Justice Department filing said.

And since we have no doubt that Kadzik performed a thorough, impartial scan of his Gmail account while resisting the urge to delete "inconvenient" records, we assume that he simply overlooked this email which provided a very timely "Heads up" to John Podesta regarding confidential information about DOJ hearings and FOIA requests.  Simple, honest mistake, no doubt.

How long can this farce continue on before government officials are finally forced to do what private corporations have been forced to do for years, namely requiring that their employees use secured, archived email systems for official communications and impose stiff penalties for non-compliance.  Seems simple enough.

Not Just Hillary, Entire Obama Administration Exposed for Using Private Email to Avoid FOIA Requests

Wikileaks is helping President Obama keep his 2008 campaign promise — to be the most transparent administration in U.S. history — whether he likes it or not. And, once again, we’re learning more about the inner sanctum of the administration and its communication practices. As FBI Director James Comey announced Friday, a new investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal has been launched, just days before the presidential election. Comey’s move drew fire instantly from the Democrats who claim Comey is attempting to sway the election in Donald Trump’s favor. While many are focused on Comey’s actions and renewed investigation, Wikileaks has uncovered what may prove to be a systemic problem of executive branch accountability not merely limited to the former secretary of state’s emails.

According to former State Department official Tom Nides, in a 2015 email to John Podesta (Clinton campaign manager), everyone in Obama’s cabinet and every White House staffer uses their personal email for government business. Nides should know as he worked under Hillary Clinton in the State Department from 2011 to 2013, according to one source.

While keeping email hidden from the public may seem like no big deal to folks who simply don’t care, ALL correspondence which is related to governmental business is the property of the federal government and is supposed to be accessible by anyone wishing to inquire within the archive of records.

The Federal Records Act defines a record as anything, “regardless of whether it exists in physical, digital, or electronic form, is a record as defined in subsection (a) shall be binding on all Federal agencies.” This includes all communication of state agents (like the POTUS) who work in the executive branch of government, as well.

But the Obama administration, according to Nides, has long since avoided the Federal Records Act by using private Gmail accounts. Nides wrote Podesta and said, “There is only one thing that needs to be done on this email thing. (Which I am sure nobody wants to do). Get a state dept career lawyer to go through all the emails and pull the official ones.” That admission seems to be on the level with what is expected for compliance with the Federal Records Act. But it was Nides’ next admission which is the talk of many major media outlets.

Nides wrote, “Btw you know as well as I every god damn cabinet officer and WH staff uses their [sic] gmail account!” The former Department of State employee revealed what many already suspected. The Obama administration is anything but transparent. Just ask Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. His organization routinely sues the Obama administration in federal court using the Freedom of Information Act as warrant for inquiry, and says the administration stonewalls his efforts at every turn. Fitton’s organization gave the Obama administration a failing grade on transparency and says his administration is even less transparent than when Bush was president.

Fitton wrote in 2015, “There are about 18 lawsuits, 10 of which are active in federal court, and about 160 Judicial Watch FOIA requests that could be affected by Mrs. Clinton and her staff’s use of secret email accounts to conduct official government business. In our various FOIA lawsuits, our lawyers have informed attorneys for the Obama administration that Hillary Clinton’s account and any other secret accounts used by State employees should be secured, recovered and searched.” JW actively seeks out those files through official methods, using FOIA and the Federal Records Act, but has been met with delay after delay from FOIA requests to the Obama administration.

While the Obama administration is on its way out, groups like Judicial Watch aren’t going anywhere, and presumably have all the time in the world to FOIA their way into digging up those deleted Clinton emails, as well as securing Gmail accounts from the Obama administration cabinet and staffers. This story is definitely a long way from being over.

It’s no wonder why so many free thinkers are now questioning the story lines they’re being told. With the president and all his men (and women), hiding their communications within their Gmail accounts, the truth is never going to be told, at least not the real truth. And by the time organizations like Judicial Watch are successful in obtaining the electronic communications records that rightly belong to the people, it will be way too late to hold anyone accountable for breaking both the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act. Julian Assange, we salute you. Thank you for forcing the Obama administration to be transparent. Keep up the valiant work!