Woman accused of tracking boyfriend with Apple AirTag, killing him with car
washingtonpost.comWhenever some AirTag news come up, I see the argument that GPS trackers had existed for a while, and they could be purchased readily through AliExpress. The argument implies that additional threat posed by the prevalence of AirTag is non-existent as the threat model had existed before.
This argument misses the point that to a non-technically-minded consumer, AirTag made stalking significantly easier not only on a technical ground (Apple's familiar UIUX), but also on an emotional ground -- Apple is an admired premium brand, and instead of buying some sketchy equipment from a no-name seller, one can walk into a pleasantly appointed Apple store and pick an AirTag on a coffee break. It makes the whole experience _feel_ more legitimate and kosher, if not pleasant.
Accessibility of a tool whether on technical, emotional, or legal grounds makes material difference in adoption and usage of said tool.
To be honest, I was always on the “AirTags are harmless” side until reading your perspective. You are probably right that making the UX so simple and coming from a trusted brand will enable many more people to misuse the technology.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to the question: is this harmful enough that we should regulate it? Answering that involves weighing the benefits against the harms.
AirTags have plenty of legitimate uses and benefits. Stories such as this article show a very real downside to the technology, but isolated stories are not a great way to make an evaluation. Doom, gloom and death will always make a more compelling story than a million people saving 5 minutes finding their keys.
Also there's a matter of the resources required.
A traditional tracker needs to provide its own location source and data connection.
Airtags recruit everyone with a smartphone to do the tracking without informed consent.
I wouldn’t call Samsung a no-name seller, and they introduced smart tags a few months before Apple (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_SmartTag, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirTag)
Also, I think Apple thought harder about this kind of problem than Samsung. They mad their tags beep every now and then because of that.
It doesn’t seem to be enough, though. I don’t see an easy way out of this. They could put a human in the loop when a user asks for a given AirTag too frequently, but that may not be enough, and would make some users unhappy because of the added friction.
It's not just accessibility but Apple's enormous network that make the difference. When you use a "standard" tracking device, it is often quite bulky as it has to contain a GSM transceiver and the battery able to power it. Airtags, on the other hand, just use Bluetooth connecting to Find My network. That's an enormous difference. You can't buy such a device from Aliexpress.
I agree with everything up until “A serious crime suddenly becomes a hip experience.” I think that’s taking it a bit too far (and demonizing Apple a bit).
Good feedback. Took out my hyperbole. Thank you. No intention to demonize Apple in any case.
For those wanting to understand the wider implications of this, Eva Galperin over at the EFF has been trying to raise awareness against stalkerware for a while. She cofounded the Coalition Against Stalkerware [1] and has a TED talk here [2]. I suspect, sadly, that we're going to see a lot more of this in future.
[1] https://stopstalkerware.org
[2] https://www.ted.com/talks/eva_galperin_what_you_need_to_know...
From what I can tell based on the news coverage, GPS trackers didn't exist before AirTags.
But seriously though, this does seem like the kind of thing Apple and Google should collaborate on and establish a standard so that any mobile operating system can notify people of unwanted trackers without requiring the installation of an app.
These aren’t GPS trackers though- GPS trackers are expensive, use a considerable amount of power, and require subscription fees to a service provider.
An AirTag is a dumb BLE chip that screams occasionally, and piggybacks off everyone’s iPhones which already have both GPS and cell subscriptions.
Apple does notify you of Air tags near you that aren’t yours.
Not if you're on Android and haven't installed the Tracker Detect app from Apple.
Even if you have, it still doesn't notify you. You have to open the app manually whenever you want to check for them.
I don't have an Android so can't verify this, but CNET makes it sound like the app scans automatically:
> If Tracker Detect notices an AirTag that's been following you for at least 10 minutes, the app will then allow you to play a sound from the AirTag so that you can more easily find the physical tracker. [1]
1: https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/how-to-tell-if-an-airtag-is...
I use Android and tested the official app. It doesn't warn you. You need to open the app and perform a manual scan.
There's an open source app called AirGuard that runs/scans in the background and sends you a notification if they detect "tracking". It drains some battery, but works okay.
But.. shouldn't BLE receiver be completely passive? I mean, it isn't transmitting anything, which should pretty much limit the algorithm to "get list of MACs, compare to another list of MACs, sleep 30s".
That is false. I get notifications for my partner's airtags.
Going off the app's reviews, it barely helps.
In F-Droid there is an app against tracking with air tags.
It is, basically, a simple BLE scanner which remembers tracker IDs and alerts user if some are sticking around for too long. sigh I wish there was a rel "radar" app which could tell the signal source direction! Theoretically, this should be possible since all modern devices have multiple (MIMO) antennas.
Honestly, I think the problem here is the girl is crazy, not that she found her boyfriend using an airtag.
Reminds me of the argument that the problem is mass shooters are crazy, not that you can legally buy AR-15s so easily.
We need to be doing more to control car usage and ownership. It should be made extremely difficult to get your car to a place where people are walking to be able to run them over. There should always be bollards or some other physical structure when physical proximity between cars and people is unavoidable.
Yes, I completely agree (non-sarcastically).
People with cars are the most dangerous human-threat things to me and my family members and that’s why I don’t own a car, don’t drive a car and live a lifestyle in which I very rarely have to get in one.
I wish countries would make the same option easy for everyone. For most people in North America, life is unlivable without a car, currently.
Only carefully trained and regulated professional transport or delivery drivers should be allowed to operate 1~3 ton killing machines. It’s insanity that 16-year-olds and 80-year-olds can with barely any oversight at all.
it sounds like you are exaggerating, but if you compare street design, a lot can be done. for example, the street outside my home has a sidewalk, a bike lane, and a row of bushes and trees before getting to car traffic. the distance from me to a moving car is more than 5 meters.
A few basic laws would drastically reduce the mortality rate: cap gas tanks to 5 gallons, cap max speed to 25 mph, require monthly psych evals at DMV, and weekly checkins with a local sheriff, and a hotline to report suspicious neighbors that look unstable and should rather take a bus. Ideally we would just ban these machines of destruction: when this country was founded, people used horses, so I see no reason why anyone should feel entitled to own a car.
Cars have uses other than killing or entertainment. Cars currently are regulated. The government can take your driver’s license away.
Weak excuses that put profits of car manufacturers over lives of children. Enough. We're a civilized society and can end this madness.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think airtags have a primary use not connected to killing things?
I think this is a better argument against allowing people to have 2 ton motorized killing machines.
FYI most mass shooters use handguns, not rifles.
That's because a mass shooting is often defined as 3+ victims of gun violence in one incident. If you heard "Mass shooting in Times Square" most people wouldn't assume "three people shot in restaurant bathroom with handgun".
I can't vouch for most people but I'd have thought it's been in the news enough that that definition was well known.
Which is an argument many people make and one you are not refuting,
"AirTags don't kill people. People kill people!"
Well, except that in this case the statement holds true.
It’d take a considerable amount of force to kill someone with an AirTag.
“AirTags don’t kill people, they enable you to catch someone in a vulnerable state so that you can kill them.”
Apparently people with AirTags kill people.
I bet she was also wearing clothes. Killers often do that.
agreed, "let's ban kitchen knives and cars"
"Let's ban men - they're potential rapists!"
When AirTag launched, the PR messaging was that it couldn't be used for this purpose.
It’s harder to use AirTags for this than other existing trackers. The tag will eventually start beeping if it’s traveling away from the owner. If you have an iPhone, you’ll get notified that a random AirTag is traveling with you.
Sounds like the victim and perpetrator lived together. What sort of publicity would this story get if she had turned on Find Friends on his phone and shared his location with her?
Don't users have to opt in to Find Friends?
There also feels like a huge difference between your personal device tracking you and that same device tracking anyone who happens to walk by. The dystopian aspect of AirTags is how they repurpose existing Apple devices to create a surveillance network.
Yeah, but the point is that if they lived together, there's a very good chance that she had the password to his phone, or had access to it when it was unlocked.
He could always temporarily disable location reporting, turn off his phone, or just not take it with him if he didn't want to be tracked during a certain time.
There's no equivalent option with AirTags, since they use ambient devices and can be carried without the bearer's knowledge. I understand what you're trying to argue, but I just don't see an equivalence here in terms of stalker enablement.
I’m not inclined to do the legwork to prove it, but I’d be shocked if there weren’t stories exactly like this in the first couple years after Find Friends rolled out.
It was certainly a concern that people had, and modern news is kinda built to validate concern whenever it can.
Paywalled. Is there a link without the paywall? I used to have 12ft.io but that stopped working too.