How to achieve 1 meter accuracy with Android Was: Re: Dropgang vulnerabilities

Punk punks at
Wed Feb 27 15:29:25 PST 2019

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 21:15:31 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987 at> wrote:

>  "   If people's movements are tracked using video surveillance then it's possible to find out who is doing suspicious things like going to a park and picking something off the ground. 
> Possible, yes.  But such video surveillance doesn't yet have enough ubiquity and resolution to identify the person, in most cases.

	Are you sure it doesn't?
	"Brand New WiFi Glasses Hidden Camera 1080P without any lens hole with two legs battery for at least 2 hours working time US $49.0-52.0 / Piece"

	That's video at 2000x1000 pixels for $50. So we can asume that the surveillance state scum uses even higher resolution.

	And then, the cameras they use can be pointed and can zoom in. I assume it's rather easy for them to do motion detection and then take pictures of people. 

	And of course there's more

	Aaannddd, it's getting worse every day. 

> "And if a place in the countryside is used, then the car used to get there is tracked. AND there may be other surveillance cameras close to the location as well."
> GPS jammers will be useful for that.

	Cars are tracked using cameras that read plate license numbers. I don't think a gps jammer will help much. Also I assume that sooner or later all cars will be radio linked to govcorp, and the moment they stop reporting their location, the cops will show up. How cool is that? 
	That is, until today's cars are replaced by google garbage and similar 'self driving' garbage. At which point...

>  "   Not to mentio, the retardphone itself, which enables the user to find stuff with 30cm accuracy AND allows the government to track its subjects with 30cm accuracy. "
> Which is one reason I suggest that the person placing the drops use a dedicated GPS device,

	Yes, it seems one could build/use different devices to work around the backdoored systems that govcorp provides. But acquiring such devices isn't necessarily easy for average users. 

> with either WAAS (1 meter accuracy) or, eventually, L1+L5 capability, with 30 cm accuracy.  Because such a device will be unlikely to have any sort of back-channel, the way smartphones usually do.  

>  "   Granted, the system may work under some circumstances but it seems to me that if it were used by a sizable amount of people, then identifying those people would be rather easy."
> Are the areas in which such drops would be usually placed sufficiently video-surveilled?

	I guess it depends. For instance, I'd expect parks in cities to be especially surveilled. And places that are not yet surveilled can be easily put under surveillance. 

	The article mentions 
	"focus on customer convenience" 
	"developments that serve the convenience" 
	"convenience that is required by most modern consumers "

	Seems to me that 'convenience' and avoiding surveillance are mutually exclusive goals. 

>  "   Second : 
>     The 'new system' allegedly replaces piece of shit tor with something EVEN WORSE : "
> I'm not commenting about TOR.

	I wasn't commenting on tor either. I'm commenting on the fact that the article claims that facebook and chinese companies will provide secure channels. Which frankly means the article is taking the readers for idiots. 


>             Jim Bell

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list