Opinion | They Stormed the Capitol. Their Apps Tracked Them.

Authored by nytimes.com and submitted by grepnork

The source shared this information, in part, because the individual was outraged by the events of Jan. 6. The source wanted answers, accountability, justice. The person was also deeply concerned about the privacy implications of this surreptitious data collection. Not just that it happens, but also that most consumers don’t know it is being collected and it is insecure and vulnerable to law enforcement as well as bad actors — or an online mob — who might use it to inflict harm on innocent people. (The source asked to remain anonymous because the person was not authorized to share the data and could face severe penalties for doing so.)

“What if instead of going to you, I wanted to publish it myself?” the source told us. “What if I were vengeful? There’s nothing preventing me from doing that. It’s totally available. If I had different motives, all it would take is a few clicks, and everyone could see it.”

There is an argument to be made that this data could be properly used by law enforcement through courts, warrants and subpoenas. We used it ourselves as a journalistic tool to bring you this article. But to think that the information will be used against individuals only if they’ve broken the law is naïve; such data is collected and remains vulnerable to use and abuse whether people gather in support of an insurrection or they justly protest police violence, as happened in cities across America last summer.

The data presented here is a bird’s-eye view of an event that posed a clear and grave threat to our democracy. But it tells a second story as well: One of a broken, surreptitious industry in desperate need of regulation, and of a tacit agreement we’ve entered into that threatens our individual privacy. None of this data should ever have been collected.

We traced a phone inside the Capitol to Mr. Vincent’s home in Kentucky. Confirming his identity led us to his Facebook page, where we found a few photos of him standing on the steps of the building during the siege. Another photo shows a crowd standing in front of the Capitol, its doors wide open.

DoomGoober on February 5th, 2021 at 16:18 UTC »

The article discusses the use of "Mobile Ad ID". As I understand it, the Mobile Ad ID is an anonymous identifier for your phone. The idea was that, say, the Facebook App could show you an ad. Facebook would know that your device 1234 saw the ad and clicked it. The ad opens the DoorDash app where you buy food. The DoorDash app tells Facebook device 1234 spent money. Facebook now knows their ad worked and can even know how much you spent.

Slight problem: Facebook knows you were logged into Facebook App when you clicked the ad. Hence, Facebook knows device 1234 is probably you! The "anonymous" mobile ad ID is not anonymous at all.

This is why Apple is moving to require user permissions before sharing Mobile Ad ID with apps as a big part of their privacy push.

ProDiesel on February 5th, 2021 at 16:03 UTC »

Little did they know the microchip tracking them was never in a vaccine but the phone they use for literally everything hahaha. I love the inability to realize that while screaming about Bill gates vaccine microchips.

GetOutOfTheWhey on February 5th, 2021 at 15:56 UTC »

Protip, if you are going to commit a crime.

Dont bring your phone. They just check the cell towers and see what numbers ping it too.