Re: COVID-19 contacts tracker (Re: a brief pondering)

John Wroclawski <jtw@csail.mit.edu> Thu, 16 April 2020 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <jtw@csail.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC9F3A0418 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KiG4EyqK0RKC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ana-server.csail.mit.edu (ana-server.csail.mit.edu [18.26.1.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B37A3A043A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ana-server.csail.mit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A04D3A53BA; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mydomain = ana-server.csail.mit.edu
Received: from ana-server.csail.mit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ana-server.csail.mit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Cb63NhS1CcHP; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:11:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.247.75] (c-66-30-11-134.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [66.30.11.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ana-server.csail.mit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B806D3A53A6; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:11:57 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Subject: Re: COVID-19 contacts tracker (Re: a brief pondering)
From: John Wroclawski <jtw@csail.mit.edu>
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <2137617384.18423.1587048987734@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:11:55 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D8F1A0A3-7FAC-4FA3-B119-C0609B731AA2@csail.mit.edu>
References: <fd6b7ee2-cdbe-14a1-0087-ce61282b22f6@lear.ch> <29D0DCA7-1D72-428F-A6DD-05511D90C039@cable.comcast.com> <2fa6a8c8-7639-a378-2ff1-3f8697556b66@cisco.com> <24cd67ab-df5a-cc2f-745f-ace19d5325ea@network-heretics.com> <59D332BC-F85E-4744-A3D0-2514551154E8@csail.mit.edu> <4E92D147-3ED1-4109-ACC7-DFA16F1D41C2@gmail.com> <7EEFEEB4-CA51-4FFF-9BAA-857EAEA49FDD@csail.mit.edu> <CAChr6Sxet86chG81qLCGzKCzdJmZZ0L6Duh_hnk+tB5WYfaR0Q@mail.gmail.com> <2137617384.18423.1587048987734@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com>
To: Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/x0B-84E4u16QLT2CHGk_SE0V530>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 17:12:16 -0000

> On Apr 16, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
>> Il 16/04/2020 09:18 Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> It's not clear that any of these tracker proposals actually harm privacy. Certainly the government in most places can get this data from phone companies and correlate it themselves.
> No, because covid19-oriented contact tracing requires much more precision than what can be provided by any location data that the operators can trace through their cellular networks; location data are unsuitable to determine a one-time contact with accuracy […] (the other reason is that this approach allows you to trace contacts even if the cellular and/or GPS connectivity is unavailable, 

Yes, exactly. The other interesting thing about the BTLE protocols being proposed is that they’re being designed to report that you came into close proximity to a person of interest, but not (depending on details) where, exactly when, etc. This, plus requiring you to explicitly release your tracking information, is the sense in which they’re “privacy preserving” - implementing minimum semantics needed for this specific purpose and no more.

Of course, one could always cross-correlate with other information (eg, cell-tower-trianguation-level location tracking) to peel some of this back. But if you’re worried about that, the next observation is that the BTLE protocols work even if your LTE radio is turned off - they remember things for later. So you can, at least conceptually, carry your phone with the wide area radio off when you want to, and still learn retrospectively that you were in proximity to a contact.