W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis-log@w3.org > February 2019

Re: [deviceorientation] Add API for requesting permission to receive device motion / orientation events (#57)

From: geoffreygaren via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2019 18:21:22 +0000
To: public-device-apis-log@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-459818413-1549045278-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@richtr You keep asserting that obfuscation, quantization, and frequency reduction solve the privacy and consent problem.

But the only sources cited in this conversation acknowledge that all such efforts so far have failed to solve the privacy and consent problem.

Regarding fingerprinting, Das-Borisov-Acar-Pradeep acknowledge that users who want privacy still need to “disable sensor access all together” (Section 7, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS”), and they “recommend browser vendors to rethink the risks of exposing sensitive sensors without any form of access control mechanism in place” (Section 8, LIMITATIONS). Das-Borisov-Chou-Mughees acknowledge that their best effort to curtail fingerprinting still has a Random Forest F-score of 26% (Section 6.2, Effectiveness of Countermeasures).

Regarding key logging and other forms of eavesdropping, nobody has suggested that obfuscation, quantization, or frequency reduction is a mitigation at all. In fact, Das-Borisov-Chou-Mughees demonstrate that these techniques intentionally preserve substantial signal and, by design, “many applications of sensor data are unlikely to be affected” (Section 7, CONCLUSION).

Regarding battery life, obfuscation, quantization, and frequency reduction use the same underlying sensors, so they plainly do not resolve the problem.

Can you cite some evidence to support your assertion that obfuscation, quantization, and frequency reduction solve the privacy and consent problem?

Or, if the solution is as simple as you say it is, you might as well just code it up and we can test it empirically.

Until then, we have an absence of evidence to support your assertion, and a presence of evidence to refute your assertion, so we have to conclude that your assertion is without merit. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by geoffreygaren
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/deviceorientation/issues/57#issuecomment-459818413 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 1 February 2019 18:21:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 1 February 2019 18:21:24 UTC