Despite the dupe factor, I support continuing to raise awareness about this. The fact that it happened at all and continues to be permitted is super messed up.
Shocking abuse of information on part of the carriers, data re-sellers, and ultimately bottom feeding scumbags who let the law run wild and unchecked.
I got the feeling something like this was going on when collection calls became responsive to my location changes the majority of the time. Imagine having no real enjoyment in life, being working poor, and each time you do leave the house you’re greeted with a reminder that you’re in debt and they’re watching you. I don’t doubt the depths of what we’ll find companies doing with access like this.
Yes, it does work. The page reports its accuracy within 2.26 miles. Measuring on Google Earth, it was off by 0.42 miles, so well within its stated accuracy on the result.
It did require me to respond "YES" to an SMS before the website provided the detail. SMS text was:
LocationSmart: Reply YES or YES LS to confirm consent for cloud location & messaging demo. Reply HELP for help, Reply STOP to cancel. Msg&Data Rates may apply.
Other responses indicate that the recipient/target has to opt into their location being shown via an SMS, so I fail to understand the outrage assuming the same requirement exists for the non-trial version.
Kevin Bankston, director of New America's Open Technology Institute, explained in a phone call that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act only restricts telecom companies from disclosing data to the government. It doesn't restrict disclosure to other companies, who then may disclose that same data to the government.
He called that loophole "one of the biggest gaps in US privacy law."
Turning off cell reception might mitigate it. They seem to use cell triangulation to determine where you are. But maybe also other techniques. That way to locate someone has been possible basically since the beginning of mobile phones - even before internet usage became a thing.
While it does indicate that their QA efforts are underwhelming, it also shows that they at least know the importance of escaping strings...or are using a tool that does some of that for them.
You can choose not to carry a cellphone, but sometimes you have to use your car which has a lot of the same "features" as a cellphone. How can you disable all that stuff on a car?
This is unbelievable, wow!! So, when I sign up with a cell carrier, is it in their terms and conditions that they can sell my location data? How is this legal?
jaytaylor|7 years ago
Despite the dupe factor, I support continuing to raise awareness about this. The fact that it happened at all and continues to be permitted is super messed up.
Shocking abuse of information on part of the carriers, data re-sellers, and ultimately bottom feeding scumbags who let the law run wild and unchecked.
harlanji|7 years ago
21|7 years ago
https://www.locationsmart.com/try/
It would be fucking unbelievable if you were able to track any US phone number like that, no ID, no court order.
ghouse|7 years ago
It did require me to respond "YES" to an SMS before the website provided the detail. SMS text was:
LocationSmart: Reply YES or YES LS to confirm consent for cloud location & messaging demo. Reply HELP for help, Reply STOP to cancel. Msg&Data Rates may apply.
drewnick|7 years ago
An SMS consent was required first. (Reply YES to consent)
ch4s3|7 years ago
heroprotagonist|7 years ago
Ugh...
greatingale|7 years ago
unknown|7 years ago
[deleted]
jdc|7 years ago
15charlimit|7 years ago
X-Istence|7 years ago
bassman9000|7 years ago
He called that loophole "one of the biggest gaps in US privacy law."
No shit.
haZard_OS|7 years ago
My location was correctly determined within the specified range. sigh Ridiculous.
kevin_thibedeau|7 years ago
kerng|7 years ago
monksy|7 years ago
crtasm|7 years ago
shkkmo|7 years ago
trumped|7 years ago
nafizh|7 years ago
ycombonator|7 years ago