Corona Update 4 (25 april(4) 2020):...
8. The corona app idea to inform people of infections around them is
no success so far, to much security/privacy concerns. I already
thought about such apps long time ago and discussed it with my
mother. She found it a bad idea, and me too actually because once
you go this route you can start creating all kinds of
"snitching"-apps and then our privacy goes out of the window.
On Sat, 2020-04-25, skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote:
Corona Update 4 (25 april(4) 2020):...
8. The corona app idea to inform people of infections around them is
no success so far, to much security/privacy concerns. I already
thought about such apps long time ago and discussed it with my
mother. She found it a bad idea, and me too actually because once
you go this route you can start creating all kinds of
"snitching"-apps and then our privacy goes out of the window.
The Pirate party showed[0] a solution which would respect privacy.
You have a phone app which roughly:
1. Sends out a series of random numbers over a short-range
communication medium. (I don't own a smartphone so I don't know if
this already exists.)
2. Receives and stores others' random numbers.
3. Receives messages like "the guy who sent <these> random numbers has
been diagnosed with a transmittable disease" and notifies the user
if the app has seen a lot of them.
No central database, and nothing meaningful to sniff for in public
places (not until you get ill anyway).
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 6:41:36 PM UTC+2, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
On Sat, 2020-04-25, skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote:
Corona Update 4 (25 april(4) 2020):...
8. The corona app idea to inform people of infections around them is
no success so far, to much security/privacy concerns. I already
thought about such apps long time ago and discussed it with my
mother. She found it a bad idea, and me too actually because once
you go this route you can start creating all kinds of
"snitching"-apps and then our privacy goes out of the window.
The Pirate party showed[0] a solution which would respect privacy.
You have a phone app which roughly:
1. Sends out a series of random numbers over a short-range
communication medium. (I don't own a smartphone so I don't know if
this already exists.)
2. Receives and stores others' random numbers.
3. Receives messages like "the guy who sent <these> random numbers has
been diagnosed with a transmittable disease" and notifies the user
if the app has seen a lot of them.
No central database, and nothing meaningful to sniff for in public
places (not until you get ill anyway).
Seems the idea here is to avoid "identification numbers".
Seems like a single person has multiple random identification numbers.
There random indentification numbers would need to be very big
others there is too much potential for conflicting and confusing
random numbers.
Also the messages in which these are "broadcast" I presume would
have to be "anonymous". So no source ip and such.
There is one problem with it though.
Let's suppose random numbers X,Y,Z are from an infected person.
How does infected person re-broadcast these numbers to inform that
this person is infected.
There needs to be some information stored about source/dest/contacts
to be able to do that.
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 6:41:36 PM UTC+2, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
On Sat, 2020-04-25, skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote:
Corona Update 4 (25 april(4) 2020):...
8. The corona app idea to inform people of infections around them is
no success so far, to much security/privacy concerns. I already
thought about such apps long time ago and discussed it with my
mother. She found it a bad idea, and me too actually because once
you go this route you can start creating all kinds of
"snitching"-apps and then our privacy goes out of the window.
The Pirate party showed[0] a solution which would respect privacy.
You have a phone app which roughly:
1. Sends out a series of random numbers over a short-range
communication medium. (I don't own a smartphone so I don't know if
this already exists.)
2. Receives and stores others' random numbers.
3. Receives messages like "the guy who sent <these> random numbers has
been diagnosed with a transmittable disease" and notifies the user
if the app has seen a lot of them.
No central database, and nothing meaningful to sniff for in public
places (not until you get ill anyway).
Seems the idea here is to avoid "identification numbers".
Seems like a single person has multiple random identification numbers.
There random indentification numbers would need to be very big others there is too much potential for conflicting and confusing random numbers.
Also the messages in which these are "broadcast" I presume would have to be "anonymous". So no source ip and such.
There is one problem with it though.
Let's suppose random numbers X,Y,Z are from an infected person.
How does infected person re-broadcast these numbers to inform that this person is infected.
There needs to be some information stored about source/dest/contacts to be able to do that.
One other solution could be to re-broadcast these numbers after infection but this would need the infected person to be close again to the original receiver.
Which seems weird or might not happen ever again.
One other solution is to start spreading these random infected numbers via a network/routing.
If this is does anoymous and via broadcasting and no IP then that might work...
However if there is no source ip can it truely be routed effeciently ?
Maybe set all destinations on routers and such... it's a bit weird idea.
Broadcasting would be a useless technology to inform others.
Even multicast might be of some use.
Some people might try to indentify these numbers though.
On Sun, 2020-04-26, skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 6:41:36 PM UTC+2, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
On Sat, 2020-04-25, skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote:
Corona Update 4 (25 april(4) 2020):...
8. The corona app idea to inform people of infections around them is
no success so far, to much security/privacy concerns. I already
thought about such apps long time ago and discussed it with my
mother. She found it a bad idea, and me too actually because once
you go this route you can start creating all kinds of
"snitching"-apps and then our privacy goes out of the window.
The Pirate party showed[0] a solution which would respect privacy.
You have a phone app which roughly:
1. Sends out a series of random numbers over a short-range
communication medium. (I don't own a smartphone so I don't know if
this already exists.)
2. Receives and stores others' random numbers.
3. Receives messages like "the guy who sent <these> random numbers has
been diagnosed with a transmittable disease" and notifies the user
if the app has seen a lot of them.
No central database, and nothing meaningful to sniff for in public
places (not until you get ill anyway).
Seems the idea here is to avoid "identification numbers".
Seems like a single person has multiple random identification numbers.
There random indentification numbers would need to be very big
others there is too much potential for conflicting and confusing
random numbers.
Also the messages in which these are "broadcast" I presume would
have to be "anonymous". So no source ip and such.
Yes. The numbers themselves carry no information, but they would have
to be anonymous. Once again, I don't know if this mechanism exists.
There is one problem with it though.
Let's suppose random numbers X,Y,Z are from an infected person.
How does infected person re-broadcast these numbers to inform that
this person is infected.
There needs to be some information stored about source/dest/contacts
to be able to do that.
I think my (3) above would be "download today's list of infected
numbers from the national health authority". If none or few of them
match numbers received in (2) you can discard the information.
But I didn't read and understand all the details. The main point was
that it's possible to implement a virus alert mechanism that doesn't
violate privacy. Provided (1) exists in phones, or in some other
equipment people are willing to carry.
On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 12:19:24 PM UTC+2, Jorgen Grahn wrote:...
But I didn't read and understand all the details. The main point was
that it's possible to implement a virus alert mechanism that doesn't
violate privacy. Provided (1) exists in phones, or in some other
equipment people are willing to carry.
Well to believe it and evaluate it logically the details would be nice to know.
IF you can find a link to it I may give it a read just for the fun of it.
Found it. It was a Facebook post by the European Pirate Party on April 18: https://www.facebook.com/europeanpirateparty/posts/3362067363806580
One more thing, somebody writes about a proposal from google, I think this could be what the dutch goverment might be considering/investigating:
https://github.com/DP-3T/documents
"Decentralized Privacy-Preserving Proximity Tracing"
Perhaps I will give this a read :)
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 294 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 246:00:30 |
| Calls: | 6,626 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,175 |
| Messages: | 5,320,576 |