On Tue, 28 May 2024 00:37:49 -0600, Charlie wrote:
Surveillance Risk: Apple's WiFi-Based Positioning System
<https://www.govinfosecurity.com/surveillance-risk-apples-wifi-based-positioning-system-a-25330>
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against privacy?
Surveillance Risk: Apple's WiFi-Based Positioning System
<https://www.govinfosecurity.com/surveillance-risk-apples-wifi-based-positioning-system-a-25330>
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against privacy?
This is a real "nothing to see here" piece of nonsense. Run for the
hills! Lock up your daughters!
BSSID's do not report anything that is a privacy risk. SSID's could
contain private data IF the owner added it to the SSID.
Note that some mapping services (such as those used by Google and Apple
and others) do collect SSID locations (Lat/Long) which are approximate
(but can be narrowed down over time). And thus when Identified can be
used as proxy location data. Big deal.
So the huge risk is to "travel routers". Sure. Once upon a time a man
with a briefcase stayed at a hotel. Yawn with snooze sauce.
The article also points out some workarounds for people who feel they
might be at risk.
On Wed, 29 May 2024 15:01:42 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Surveillance Risk: Apple's WiFi-Based Positioning System
<https://www.govinfosecurity.com/surveillance-risk-apples-wifi-based-positioning-system-a-25330>
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against privacy?
This is a real "nothing to see here" piece of nonsense. Run for the
hills! Lock up your daughters!
Are you saying that only because it was Apple who got caught?
Note that the problem isn't a new problems; what's new is that nobody expected Apple, of all companies, of abusing everyone's privacy.
On 2024-05-29 18:17, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2024 15:01:42 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against
privacy?
This is a real "nothing to see here" piece of nonsense. Run for the
hills! Lock up your daughters!
Are you saying that only because it was Apple who got caught?
I'm saying it because it is a non issue and click bait at best.
Note that the problem isn't a new problems; what's new is that nobody
expected Apple, of all companies, of abusing everyone's privacy.
This does not abuse privacy. If you have a WiFi station broadcasting
its B/SSID it is the antithesis of wanting privacy.
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl
clutching.
This does not abuse privacy. If you have a WiFi station broadcasting
its B/SSID it is the antithesis of wanting privacy.
This strange idea that B/SSIDs are private is laughable. It's as if
these trolls have been hiding under rocks for the past few decades, completely unaware that SSIDs are perfectly visible to anyone nearby.
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl
clutching.
Yes, because: troll.
Are you saying that only because it was Apple who got caught?
I'm saying it because it is a non issue and click bait at best.
Note that the problem isn't a new problems; what's new is that nobody
expected Apple, of all companies, of abusing everyone's privacy.
This does not abuse privacy. If you have a WiFi station broadcasting
its B/SSID it is the antithesis of wanting privacy. Your "protection"
at that point is strong passwords against intrusion. That's all.
And if you travel with a portable access point, there are other ways to "scramble" the BSSID.
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl clutching.
On 2024-05-29 18:17, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2024 15:01:42 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
This is a real "nothing to see here" piece of nonsense.� Run for theSurveillance Risk: Apple's WiFi-Based Positioning System
<https://www.govinfosecurity.com/surveillance-risk-apples-wifi-based-positioning-system-a-25330>
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against privacy? >>>
hills!� Lock up your daughters!
Are you saying that only because it was Apple who got caught?
I'm saying it because it is a non issue and click bait at best.
Note that the problem isn't a new problems; what's new is that nobody
expected Apple, of all companies, of abusing everyone's privacy.
This does not abuse privacy. If you have a WiFi station broadcasting
its B/SSID it is the antithesis of wanting privacy. Your "protection"
at that point is strong passwords against intrusion. That's all.
And if you travel with a portable access point, there are other ways to "scramble" the BSSID.
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl clutching.
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl clutching.
Unfortunately in this newsgroup there are a lot of know-nothing trolls
and a lot of conspiracy nutters, with some 'people' (for want of a
better term) being in both groupings.
On Wed, 29 May 2024 19:29:12 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Are you saying that only because it was Apple who got caught?
I'm saying it because it is a non issue and click bait at best.
You can say privacy is a non issue but doesn't Apple advertise it?
Using <news:v398c4$1j74g$[email protected]>, Your Name wrote:
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl clutching.
Unfortunately in this newsgroup there are a lot of know-nothing trolls
and a lot of conspiracy nutters, with some 'people' (for want of a
better term) being in both groupings.
Seems pretty real in government, Apple
On 30 May 2024 00:51:53 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
This does not abuse privacy. If you have a WiFi station
broadcasting its B/SSID it is the antithesis of wanting privacy.
This strange idea that B/SSIDs are private is laughable. It's as if
these trolls have been hiding under rocks for the past few decades,
completely unaware that SSIDs are perfectly visible to anyone nearby.
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Just use a database that contains a worldwide listing of known and
uploaded BSSID's such as:
https://wigle.net/
On 2024-05-30 04:41, david wrote:
Using <news:v398c4$1j74g$[email protected]>, Your Name wrote:
But of course, launch off the deep end into the panic a pearl
clutching.
Unfortunately in this newsgroup there are a lot of know-nothing
trolls and a lot of conspiracy nutters, with some 'people' (for want
of a better term) being in both groupings.
Seems pretty real in government, Apple
The silly troll is trying to slant this as an Apple issue.
It's not. At all. It's a public broadcast signal - anyone can record
them and where and when they were recorded.
Don't need an Apple device.
Or for that matter, any device.
Just use a database that contains a worldwide listing of known and
uploaded BSSID's such as:
https://wigle.net/
You can say privacy is a non issue but doesn't Apple advertise it?
Context: BSSID
Privacy: BSSID's are openly broadcast for a reason.
Not an Apple issue.
"EERMEGHERD! ThIs Is A pRiVaCy IsSuE! HoW dArE tHeY rEaD sSiDs BeInG bRoAdCaSt By MiLlIoNs Of RoUtErS?!?1!!" - morons everywhere
Next, these smooth brains will try to explain how Apple doing it "Is DiFfErEnT!"... Watch.
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have any
idea how ridiculous you sound?
On this Thu, 30 May 2024 07:44:22 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Just use a database that contains a worldwide listing of known and
uploaded BSSID's such as:
https://wigle.net/
You didn't read the paper. https://www.cs.umd.edu/~dml/papers/wifi-surveillance-sp24.pdf
They discussed Wigle & Google. And Starlink too. The problem is Apple.
On this 30 May 2024 14:45:18 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
"EERMEGHERD! ThIs Is A pRiVaCy IsSuE! HoW dArE tHeY rEaD sSiDs BeInG
bRoAdCaSt By MiLlIoNs Of RoUtErS?!?1!!" - morons everywhere
Since even the Apple shills directly blame Apple for this privacy hole
On 30 May 2024 14:40:19 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are
you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have
any idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
On 2024-05-30, Oscar Mayer <[email protected]> wrote:
On 30 May 2024 14:40:19 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are
you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have
any idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
Sure I do. You don't seem to know that your router's BSSID isn't private information.
On 30 May 2024 15:58:22 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are
you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you
have any idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
Sure I do. You don't seem to know that your router's BSSID isn't
private information.
It's obvious you have no idea what a BSSID is, versus what an SSID is.
only Apple has this problem
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are
you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have
any idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
Sure I do. You don't seem to know that your router's BSSID isn't private information.
The problem is Apple.
Yes, you can do that with Wigle as well.
Again, routers broadcast their
B/SSIDs to the world - everyone can see them, which is why there are
numerous databases of them.
There's nothing special about Apple in that
regard. It's just another database of WiFi SSIDs.
On Thu, 30 May 2024 07:35:14 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
You can say privacy is a non issue but doesn't Apple advertise it?
Context: BSSID
Privacy: BSSID's are openly broadcast for a reason.
In every paper they discuss that Apple is the problem, not the BSSID.
"In this work, we show that Apple's WPS can be abused
On 30 May 2024 14:40:19 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are you
excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have any
idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do you?
aper they discuss that Apple is the problem, not the BSSID.
Yes - when a dumbass editor will sign off on it so a writer gets paid,
the writer can be sure it will be expedited for mentioning "privacy"
"issue" and "Apple" in the same paper or article.
Gullible schmucks eat it up.
"In this work, we show that Apple's WPS can be abused
ANY WiFi device can detect BSSIDs.
Couple that to the position
- from GPS or
- trilaterated from cell towers
- hand entered by those gelatinous forms called low wager workers
And you have a proxy position and time of detection.
OH THE HUMANITY!
Wigle.net and other databases also let you look up routers
by SSID and BSSID.
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do you?
The fact that he pointed it out as SSID rather than BSSID shows JR knows precisely what the difference is.
The latter is usually obfuscated from the user as not esp. useful to
users. Though it is in the clear and clearly visible with a deeper look and/or with scanning tools available for pretty much every OS.
Since even the Apple shills directly blame Apple for this privacy hole
A database of publicly-broadcasted WiFi BSSIDs is not a "privacy hole".
On 30 May 2024 15:56:03 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Since even the Apple shills directly blame Apple for this privacy hole
A database of publicly-broadcasted WiFi BSSIDs is not a "privacy hole".
Only Apple has this vulnerability.
https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/24/apple-location-services-vulnerability/ "However, there is one crucial difference between the way in which Apple
and Google devices carry out this task - and that's where the privacy issue arises."
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:32:56 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
aper they discuss that Apple is the problem, not the BSSID.
Yes - when a dumbass editor will sign off on it so a writer gets paid,
the writer can be sure it will be expedited for mentioning "privacy"
"issue" and "Apple" in the same paper or article.
Gullible schmucks eat it up.
It's clear you don't understand the issue when you and Jolly Roger are the only people in the world who say it's not specifically an Apple issue.
https://www.macworld.com/article/2343297/apple-wi-fi-network-wps-vulnerability-location-services-leak.html
"researchers at the University of Maryland have discovered a crucial vulnerability in the way Apple's location services work"
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:39:18 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do you?
The fact that he pointed it out as SSID rather than BSSID shows JR
knows precisely what the difference is.
It's obvious that Jolly Roger doesn't know the difference between an SSID
and a BSSID because it was clear that the problem isn't in the SSID at all.
On 30 May 2024 15:54:58 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
The problem is Apple.
Yes, you can do that with Wigle as well.
No you can't.
On 2024-05-30 11:27, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On 30 May 2024 14:40:19 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you excusing Apple just because Apple got caught doing it?
Every single time you join WiFi you see a list of nearby SSIDs. Are
you excusing yourself because you "got caught" doing it? Do you have
any idea how ridiculous you sound?
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
The fact that he pointed it out as SSID rather than BSSID shows JR
knows precisely what the difference is.
The latter is usually obfuscated from the user as not esp. useful to
users. Though it is in the clear and clearly visible with a deeper
look and/or with scanning tools available for pretty much every OS.
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:32:56 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
aper they discuss that Apple is the problem, not the BSSID.
Yes - when a dumbass editor will sign off on it so a writer gets
paid, the writer can be sure it will be expedited for mentioning
"privacy" "issue" and "Apple" in the same paper or article.
Gullible schmucks eat it up.
It's clear you don't understand the issue
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:39:18 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do
you?
The fact that he pointed it out as SSID rather than BSSID shows JR
knows precisely what the difference is.
It's obvious that Jolly Roger doesn't know the difference between an
SSID and a BSSID
the WAN-facing BSSID is unique to the router and unchangeable
On 30 May 2024 18:08:01 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Wigle.net and other databases also let you look up routers
by SSID and BSSID.
Every excuse
On 2024-05-30 17:14, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:32:56 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
aper they discuss that Apple is the problem, not the BSSID.
Yes - when a dumbass editor will sign off on it so a writer gets paid,
the writer can be sure it will be expedited for mentioning "privacy"
"issue" and "Apple" in the same paper or article.
Gullible schmucks eat it up.
It's clear you don't understand the issue when you and Jolly Roger are the >> only people in the world who say it's not specifically an Apple issue.
https://www.macworld.com/article/2343297/apple-wi-fi-network-wps-vulnerability-location-services-leak.html
"researchers at the University of Maryland have discovered a crucial
vulnerability in the way Apple's location services work"
Your problem is your gullibility. "Apple" is your trigger word.
Go work it out with a psychologist.
On 2024-05-30 17:12, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On Thu, 30 May 2024 14:39:18 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
You don't know the difference between a unique BSSID & an SSID, do you? >>>The fact that he pointed it out as SSID rather than BSSID shows JR
knows precisely what the difference is.
It's obvious that Jolly Roger doesn't know the difference between an SSID
and a BSSID because it was clear that the problem isn't in the SSID at all.
It's actually the root of it which you would know if you knew at all
what it going on. I'll explain this as to a child to give you a
fighting chance.
When an a device such as a phone detects a WiFi access point it gets all sorts of interesting information.
1. The BSSID which is a binary code (usually expressed in hexadecimal).
2. The SSID which is a label assigned to it by whoever administers the
access point. "AirPortFreeWiFi" for example.
The device (phone) user usually is only interested in the latter - he
picks from whatever is available to access the WiFi - if it is password access, then of course he'll need that too.
The actual working connection does not use the SSID - it uses the BSSID.
(You can refer to it is as the MAC or Wi-Fi address if that helps you connect all these big people ideas - although they often/usually the
same they don't have to be the same...).
Most devices will display the BSSID if the user wants to delve into it.
On most phones this would be shown as the MAC or Wi-Fi address. Or of course, once can use one of many tools to display same.
Thus - in JR's earlier reply - he was being quite clear about what he
was replying to and did so correctly.
On Thu, 30 May 2024 17:27:05 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
It's obvious that Jolly Roger doesn't know the difference between an SSID >>> and a BSSID because it was clear that the problem isn't in the SSID at all. >>It's actually the root of it which you would know if you knew at all
what it going on. I'll explain this as to a child to give you a
fighting chance.
When an a device such as a phone detects a WiFi access point it gets all
sorts of interesting information.
1. The BSSID which is a binary code (usually expressed in hexadecimal).
2. The SSID which is a label assigned to it by whoever administers the
access point. "AirPortFreeWiFi" for example.
The device (phone) user usually is only interested in the latter - he
picks from whatever is available to access the WiFi - if it is password
access, then of course he'll need that too.
The actual working connection does not use the SSID - it uses the BSSID.
(You can refer to it is as the MAC or Wi-Fi address if that helps you
connect all these big people ideas - although they often/usually the
same they don't have to be the same...).
Most devices will display the BSSID if the user wants to delve into it.
On most phones this would be shown as the MAC or Wi-Fi address. Or of
course, once can use one of many tools to display same.
Thus - in JR's earlier reply - he was being quite clear about what he
was replying to and did so correctly.
It's clear you don't understand the issue
"However, there is one crucial difference between the way in which Apple
and Google devices carry out this task - and that's where the privacy issue arises."
It's obvious that Jolly Roger doesn't know the difference between an SSID
and a BSSID because it was clear that the problem isn't in the SSID at all.
It's actually the root of it which you would know if you knew at all
what it going on. I'll explain this as to a child to give you a
fighting chance.
When an a device such as a phone detects a WiFi access point it gets all sorts of interesting information.
1. The BSSID which is a binary code (usually expressed in hexadecimal).
2. The SSID which is a label assigned to it by whoever administers the
access point. "AirPortFreeWiFi" for example.
The device (phone) user usually is only interested in the latter - he
picks from whatever is available to access the WiFi - if it is password access, then of course he'll need that too.
The actual working connection does not use the SSID - it uses the BSSID.
(You can refer to it is as the MAC or Wi-Fi address if that helps you connect all these big people ideas - although they often/usually the
same they don't have to be the same...).
Most devices will display the BSSID if the user wants to delve into it.
On most phones this would be shown as the MAC or Wi-Fi address. Or of course, once can use one of many tools to display same.
Thus - in JR's earlier reply - he was being quite clear about what he
was replying to and did so correctly.
It's clear
only people in the world who say it's not specifically an Apple issue.
https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/24/apple-location-services-vulnerability/ "However, there is one crucial difference between the way in which Apple
and Google devices carry out this task - and that's where the privacy issue arises."
Of course it is. It's broadcast by routers. It's public information.
There is no "privacy violation" inherent in looking at publicly
broadcast information.
The "general" case is that it is absolutely not an Apple issue.
SSID/BSSID's are OPENLY AND LOUDLY BROADCAST WORLDIWDE IN THE BILLIONS.
Of course it is. It's broadcast by routers. It's public information.
There is no "privacy violation" inherent in looking at publicly
broadcast information.
Gullible schmucks eat it up.
It's clear you don't understand the issue
You're projecting. It is you who does not understand how WiFi works.
Wigle.net and other databases also let you look up routers
by SSID and BSSID.
Every excuse
There is no excuse. WiFi routers broadcast their SSIDs as well as their BSSIDs to the world. That's how WiFi works, you ignorant troll.
the WAN-facing BSSID is unique to the router and unchangeable
Irrelevant. It is broadcast to the world. No privacy issue here.
Alan Browne wrote on Thu, 30 May 2024 19:18:55 -0400 :
The "general" case is that it is absolutely not an Apple issue.
SSID/BSSID's are OPENLY AND LOUDLY BROADCAST WORLDIWDE IN THE BILLIONS.
The fact is you're defending Apple's holes, to the death, no matter what.
Every desperate excuse you make for the flaws in Apple's implementation
show you not understand what only Apple does that's different here.
Worse, you were not aware the outward facing MAC address cannot be cloned
(in almost all routers and particularly in the tested travel routers).
And you were not aware that the SSID is meaningless for this exploit, other than the workaround that Apple suggested (of appending _nomac to the SSID).
Furthermore, you're still not aware that a "hidden broadcast" has been a feature of nearly every router since the dawn of Wi-Fi, where the mere act
of clicking that checkbox prevents the BSSID from being *uploaded* to the Google and Apple and Mozilla and Wigle databases, by default. (See notes in the sig, given the Apple religious zealots don't understand this issue).
Apple trigger word got ya huh?
Since even the Apple shills directly blame Apple for this privacy hole
A database of publicly-broadcasted WiFi BSSIDs is not a "privacy hole".
Only Apple
Nope, sorry.
The problem is Apple.
Yes, you can do that with Wigle as well.
No you can't.
Yes, you can.
On Thu, 30 May 2024 17:29:15 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Apple trigger word got ya huh?
You're the one making excuse after excuse for Apple's flawed coding.
Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 21:37:35 GMT :
Wigle.net and other databases also let you look up routers
by SSID and BSSID.
Every excuse
There is no excuse. WiFi routers broadcast their SSIDs as well as their
BSSIDs to the world. That's how WiFi works, you ignorant troll.
If I'm ignorant and you know so much about how broadcasts work, why does
nothing you have ever said show any indication of how they actually work?
Note 1: While almost every router has an option to hide the broadcast packets, that hidden broadcast setting won't prevent a seasoned attacker
On 30 May 2024 21:30:12 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
The problem is Apple.
Yes, you can do that with Wigle as well.
No you can't.
Yes, you can.
Every government, security researcher and even Apple centric publication reported the problem is the specific way that only Apple has implemented
the vulnerability.
Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 21:33:55 GMT :
Of course it is. It's broadcast by routers. It's public information.
There is no "privacy violation" inherent in looking at publicly
broadcast information.
That sentence proves beyond any doubt that these ignorant uneducated Apple religious zealots have absolutely no understanding of how broadcasts work.
Their only desperate goal is to defend Apple's flaws to the death.
See technical notes in the sig since adults understand what they do not.
Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 21:36:46 GMT :
the WAN-facing BSSID is unique to the router and unchangeable
Irrelevant. It is broadcast to the world. No privacy issue here.
And yet, it's not.
On 2024-05-31 13:58, Andrew wrote:
Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 21:37:35 GMT :
Wigle.net and other databases also let you look up routers by SSID
and BSSID.
Every excuse
There is no excuse. WiFi routers broadcast their SSIDs as well as
their BSSIDs to the world. That's how WiFi works, you ignorant
troll.
If I'm ignorant and you know so much about how broadcasts work, why
does
Your wording shows you're searching the web and employing the results
badly.
nothing you have ever said show any indication of how they actually
work?
Note 1: While almost every router has an option to hide the broadcast
packets, that hidden broadcast setting won't prevent a seasoned
attacker
Seasoned attacker? A CHILD can get at the BSSID when the SSID is
hidden, you fool.
On 30 May 2024 21:30:37 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
Since even the Apple shills directly blame Apple for this privacy
hole
A database of publicly-broadcasted WiFi BSSIDs is not a "privacy
hole".
Only Apple
Nope, sorry.
Nobody but you
Alan Browne wrote on Thu, 30 May 2024 19:18:55 -0400 :
The "general" case is that it is absolutely not an Apple issue.
SSID/BSSID's are OPENLY AND LOUDLY BROADCAST WORLDIWDE IN THE
BILLIONS.
The fact is
On 2024-05-31, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote:
Alan Browne wrote on Thu, 30 May 2024 19:18:55 -0400 :
The "general" case is that it is absolutely not an Apple issue.
SSID/BSSID's are OPENLY AND LOUDLY BROADCAST WORLDIWDE IN THE
BILLIONS.
The fact is
You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face, little Arlen.
On 30 May 2024 21:30:12 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
The problem is Apple.
Yes, you can do that with Wigle as well.
No you can't.
Yes, you can.
Every government blah blah blah
The fact is you're defending Apple's holes, to the death, no matter what.
I'm not defending what Apple do. What Apple do is their choice and it
is no more harmful than what others do. It's different. That's all.
But you do you: desperately misinform and spread BS
Every desperate excuse you make for the flaws in Apple's implementation
show you not understand what only Apple does that's different here.
Worse, you were not aware the outward facing MAC address cannot be cloned
(in almost all routers and particularly in the tested travel routers).
Completely irrelevant.
But play all you want.
And you were not aware that the SSID is meaningless for this exploit, other >> than the workaround that Apple suggested (of appending _nomac to the SSID).
You're clearly not following.
Furthermore, you're still not aware that a "hidden broadcast" has been a
feature of nearly every router since the dawn of Wi-Fi, where the mere act >> of clicking that checkbox prevents the BSSID from being *uploaded* to the
Google and Apple and Mozilla and Wigle databases, by default. (See notes in >> the sig, given the Apple religious zealots don't understand this issue).
Not only understand it, have reliable knowledge that hardly anyone uses it.
You're really grasping.
You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face
I did leave out that the SSID can be muted. But that is not at all
relevant to the discussion.
It is only you throwing more distraction at things to try (desperately)
to score points.
Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 31 May 2024 15:12:41 -0400 :
The fact is you're defending Apple's holes, to the death, no matter what. >>I'm not defending what Apple do. What Apple do is their choice and it
is no more harmful than what others do. It's different. That's all.
And yet, no other company except Apple has this huge privacy vulnerability.
the WAN-facing BSSID is unique to the router and unchangeable
Irrelevant. It is broadcast to the world. No privacy issue here.
And yet, it's not.
Yes it is. That's why it's called a "WAN-facing BSSID", numbskull.
And have the shitty evening you deserve.
And yet, no other company except Apple has this huge privacy vulnerability.
The "privacy vulnerability" of being able to look up a router in a
database and get the BSSID of it and all nearby routers - which isn't exclusive to Apple's database at all.
Jolly Roger wrote on 31 May 2024 20:18:42 GMT :
You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face
And yet, blah blah blah blah
It's just
public information made accessible by an API and service, which is
exactly what Apple's service is. And the fact that you don't know this
says all we need to know about you.
You're the one making excuse after excuse for Apple's flawed coding.
It's not flawed. It's doing as designed. Do keep up.
On 2024-05-28 17:37, Oscar Mayer wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2024 00:37:49 -0600, Charlie wrote:
Surveillance Risk: Apple's WiFi-Based Positioning System
<https://www.govinfosecurity.com/surveillance-risk-apples-wifi-based-positioning-system-a-25330>
Why would Apple design a system so incredibly horrific against privacy?
This is a real "nothing to see here" piece of nonsense. Run for the
hills! Lock up your daughters!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 12:38:04 |
| Calls: | 12,100 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,518,002 |