apple – j2i.net

Testing a Faraday Bag with AirTags

Among my many gadgets I have a Faraday Bag. Faraday bags are essentially a flexible version of a faraday cage. Such devices contain metalic content and prevent the passage of radio signals. You have probably seen various applications of this, such as wallets or envelops designed to prevent an NFC credit card from being read, or the metalic grid in the door of a Microwave oven that prevents the microwave radiation from getting out.

I won’t get into the physics of how these work. But it is worth noting that a Faraday cage may only work for a range frequencies. A cage that prevents one device from getting a signal might not have the same effect on another that uses a different frequency. While I’ve seen that my Faraday Bag has successfully blocked WiFi and cellular signals from reaching my phone and tablet, I wanted to see if it would work with an AirTag. For those unfamiliar, the AirTag is Apple’s implementation of a Bluetooth tracking device. Another well known Bluetooth tracker is from Tile. The fundamentals of how these devices work is essentially the same.

The trackers are low-energy Bluetooth devices. If the tracker is near your phone, the phone detects the signal and the ID unique to the tracker. The phone takes notice where it was located when it looses signal to the tracker and generally assumes that the tracker is in the last place that it was when it received a signal. That isn’t always the case. The tracker my have been moved after the phone lost the signal (think of a device left in a taxi). The next method of locating that these devices use is that other people’s phones may see the tracker and relay the position. For the Tile devices anyone else that has the Tile app on their phone effectively participates in relaying the position of tiles that they encounter. For the AirTag anyone with a fairly recent iPhone and Firmware participates. My expectation is that that the ubiquity of the iPhone will make it the location network with more coverage. As a test, I gave an AirTag to a wiling participant and asked that they keep the device for a day. When I checked in on the location of the Device using the “Find My” app on the iPhone, I could see the person’s movements. On a commute to work, other iPhones that the person drove by on the Interstate reported the position. I could see the person’s location within a few minutes of them arriving at work.

There are some obvious privacy concerns with these devices. Primarily from an unwilling party having an AirTag put in their belongings. Apple is working on some solutions for some of the security concerns, though others remain. I thought about someone transporting a device with an AirTag that may not want their location located. One way to do this is to remove the battery. Another is to block the signal. Since I already have a Faraday Bag I decided to test out this second method.

I found that my Faraday Bag successfully blocks the AirTag from being detected or from receiving a signal. You can see the test in the above video. This addresses one of the concern for such trackers, though not all of them. This is great for an AirTag that one is knowingly transporting. For one that a person doesn’t realize is in their belongings, a method of detection is needed. For iPhone users, the iPhone is reported to alert a user if there is an AirTag that stays within their proximity that is not their own. Results from others testing this have been a bit mixed. The AirTags are also reportedly going to play an alert sound if they arenot within range of their owner for some random interval between 8 and 24 hours.

Presently, Android users would not get a warning. Though Apple is said to be working on an application for Android for detecting lingering AirTags. In the absence of such an application, I’ve tried using Bluetooth scanners on Android. The Airtag is successfully detected. The vendor (Apple) can be retrieved from the AirTag, but no other information is retrievable. I’ve got some ideas on how to specifically identify an AirTag within code for Android, but need to do more testing to validate this. This is something that I plan to return to later on.

I purchased this Faraday Bag some time ago. The specific bag that I have is, from what I have found, no longer available. But other comparable bags are available on Amazon.

Posts may contain products with affiliate links. When you make purchases using these links, we receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support.

Faraday Bag for Tablets and Phones.

Silicon AirTag Case

Twitter: @j2inet
Instagram: @j2inet
Facebook: j2inet
YouTube: j2inet

Hearing on Online Platforms and Market Power

Today, July 29, 2020, the CEOs of four technology companies will meet virtually with a House subcommittee about their market power. Some have asserted that these companies have monopolies or near-monopolies. Time Cook of Apple, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Sundar Pichai of Google, and Jeff Bezos of Amazon will be present. There was a push for Jack Dorsey of Twitter to attend from representative Jim Jordon of Ohio, but he is not expected to attend.

These companies are being investigated for their market dominance. For Apple, a key issue is that the only method of distribution to iOS devices is through the Apple App Store. While it is the case for a number of consumer devices that the device manufacturer is the only entity that can decide if an application will be available to the device (ex: Nintendo licensing games for the Switch, Sony for the Playstations, Microsoft for the Xbox) some entities have asserted that the arrangement is unfair. Most notably Spotify made a complaint about the revenue split terms for the Apple App Store and being disallowed from advertising other ways that a customer may purchase its service that do not involve Apple.

Amazon’s use of data that is has collected is in question. It’s combination of customer data, seller data, and its intelligence capabilities give it a significant advantage. Not only does Amazon sell items from third parties, it also produces its own products that compete with those providers. There is a question of it being fair.

For Facebook’s acquisition strategies are in question. And it also has a large advertising network that is being scrutinized.

Google, in addition to having the worlds most popular search engine, also has a wide advertising network. Google also gained the attention of regulators in the European Union because if its search engine giving preference to Google products for some types of searches.

Live-streaming of the hearing will be available on YouTube at the following starting at 12:00PM Eastern Time today, 29 July 2020.

Livestream/Replay

This isn’t the first hearing that the committee has had, but it will be the first one at which these CEOs have all been present. In previous hearings in which representatives from Facebook or Google have been present it hasn’t been unusual for questions to not focus on the investigation, but to also be on other topics of interest. In addition to questions on the competition practices, I expect there to be questioned on censorship, with the most recent well-known instance being the removal of a group that called themselves “American Frontline Doctors.” The group held a live stream on Monday that made claims of a cure for COVID-19, stating that masks offer no question, and made many other statements that contradict the advice of health organizations. The video was removed by Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube in addition to SquareSpace deciding to terminate their hosting agreement for the group’s site.

Previous hearings from the sub-committee are also available for viewing.

Free and Diverse Press (June 11, 2019)
H.R. 3942, Preventing the Sale of E-Cigarettes (June 11, 2019)
Competition in Labor Markets (29 October, 2019)
The perspective of the Antitrust Agencies (2019 November 13)
Competitors in the Digital Economy (Jan 17, 2020)
Online Platforms and Market Power (July 29, 2020)

Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, and Facebook Called to Congress

Some of the largest technology companies in the USA have yet again been called to testify at the House of Representatives to testify. They have been called many times before. This time it is on competition. Some have alleged that each of these companies has done something to hinder competition and they are being called to speak on it. In a letter written to these companies the House has asked that the CEOs of these companies be the ones to testify. They are also asking the companies to produce documents that were generated in response to competition. If the companies do not produce documentation they may be subpoenaed and obligated to produce it anyway.

For Apple the only way to publish an application is through the Apple App Store. For applications published thay way Apple earns a portion of the sales and subscriptions. Apps sold through the App store cannot advertise paying for services through means other than the App store.

Alphabet (the parent company of Google) has been accused of anticompetitive behaviours along several fronts. This includes giving preference to Alphabet provided serviced in Google searches and having an extensive advertising vertical.

Amazon is a bit unique. Previous anticompetitive cases have focused on consumer welfare. But Amazon’s practices haven’t met past criteria for poor consumer welfare. Amazon has access to lots of sells data and the computational and AI capabilities for profitably using that information and under pricing those that sell through their service.

Facebook has been accused of cutting developers off from their services to serve their own purposes. They have also purchased other services that might have competed with them otherwise (ex:Instagram). Some competitors have described Facebook as an unlawful monopoly.

Whether or not these companies engage in anticompetitive behaviour is a topic of debate. This hearing is part of an ongoing investigation into competition in technology. At the same time the EU is launching an anti-competitive investigation on Apple’s App Store and on Apple Pay. The investigation is based on a complaint from Spotify from last year and a complaint from an unnamed ebook/audio-book distributor. Their complaints are on the fee that must be payed to Apple for services purchased through the user’s iOS device and the prohibitions on communicating to users how they can upgrade their services through other means. For Apple Pay the investigation is on that being the only contactless payment solution that can be deployed to the iPhone. Especially at a time when there is increased interest in contacless transactions in the wake of COVID-19.