One thing I’m concerned about is recording equipment leaving identifiable information without us knowing about it.

  • Dr_Vindaloo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    5 months ago

    Most modern cars are SIM-enabled and are constantly sending data back to the mothership. But even those that aren’t will still collect data locally and that data will be collected when you send the car to an “official/licenced/authorized” repair shop.

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      5 months ago

      I hate this.

      I’m still driving a '99 vehicle and the most advanced thing about it are the power windows. I dread upgrading to a vehicle that can break in so many new ways. I hate that everything has touch screens and the software on many is awful and if it breaks, surprise, you have no music in your car now.

      • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Those still have an ECU that stores most of the same data. It knows you speed, it knows how hard you brake, etc. anything with an OBD will store data. And that’s carssince the 70s

          • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’ll be surprised, they take snapshots at certain points. In a collision all vehicles will store last 5 or so seconds of data, speed, see if brakes are engaged, stuff like that, it’s all used in collision investigations. There’s not a single car I think that’s doesn’t do this. As I said, it’s in some form, but your vehicle does know if you’ve sped if it has an obd on it.

            What do you think basic OBD stuff is? It’s all that information and that’s used to see if anything’s wrong with the vehicle.

              • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                No, even ODB from the 70s records you max reached speed, if you’ve hit the governer/rev limiter and how many times.

                It’s nothing modern, modern just does it more frequent, more situations, more information, more data points, and mandatory black boxes.

                And many vehicles from 2000 onwards have dedicated EDR boxes, what make and model and trim is your 2012?

                So sounds like you don’t quite know what’s going on under your hood there ;)

    • modus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      So where’s the directory of where to find the transmitter/SIM in specific vehicles?

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        You can look this up for your model. When I was looking this, there was a youtube video showing how to physically renove chevy’s onstar thing in the car

  • मुक्त@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Photos taken by digital cameras are also trackable in a similar way as prints taken from a printer. I recall reading they were trying to identify the device after a Harry Potter book was leaked by someone taking digital photographs.

    • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Was it just EXIF information or was it something embedded in the pixels? If it’s just EXIF that’s something you can scrub from the file easily.

    • who@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      To be clear, this is not about EXIF data (which is its own problem).

      Digital cameras can be fingerprinted from the images they produce, due to variations between pixels in any given sensor. If you’re concerned about an image being traced back to your camera, you might consider some post-processing before distributing it.

      • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s the obvious one. But you can also add data to images by adding tiny values to the pixels, it’ll still look the same to us (same as printer tiny dots).

        I don’t know if phones actually do this. Just saying it’s possible.

        But many uploading sites optimize the images, so it’ll be gone on reshare, but they could get it on first upload.

  • Ardens@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Isn’t it common knowledge? I’ve known about it for at least two decades…

    BTW - you can easily work around it. Get someone else to buy your printer for you, or trade with someone who has the same printer… Now, they will still be able to match it to the printer, if they find it at your home, but other that that, you are free…

    PS. Don’t use your printer to blackmail FBI or CIA. ;-)

    • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      Pro tip: If you use a pen and paper to blackmail the FBI and CIA, they can’t trace it back to you using invisible yellow dots.

    • Eheran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      There is no connection from a random printer you buy somewhere anonymous to you. They can “only” verify something was (not) printed with that printer.

      • Ardens@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        As I said - but there could be a connection. Did you use cash or a card? Some places you have a membership, or they ask if you want the receipt on your mail…

          • Ardens@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Feel free to believe that. 🙃 Far be it for me, to educate you…

            • Eheran@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              So you just want to say things you believe and not tell others why you believe them and even dislike being asked?

              • Ardens@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                If you don’t know how your credit cars ties you to a printer with a serial number, sold by a store that saves it all - then I don’t want to help you. It’s not a belief, it’s fact. I like being asked, I don’t like ignorant morons, that says stupid things and either want to pick a fight, or are truly clueless. You can decide for yourself, which category you are in… Now go troll someone else.

  • Homme_Tanks [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    There is a new web fingerprinting technique that uses your GPU’s individual idiosyncratic performance characteristics to enable/boost efficacy of web fingerprinting: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/researchers-use-gpu-fingerprinting-to-track-users-online/

    A team of researchers from French, Israeli, and Australian universities has explored the possibility of using people’s GPUs to create unique fingerprints and use them for persistent web tracking. The results of their large-scale experiment involving 2,550 devices with 1,605 distinct CPU configurations show that their technique, named ‘DrawnApart,’ can boost the median tracking duration to 67% compared to current state-of-the-art methods.

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.09956