FACT:
>
> 1. Apple and Google both crowd source Wi-Fi and cellular identifiers.
> Their goal is stated to be in order to improve location accuracy. >
> Most Apple/Android mobile devices are configured by default to
> upload nearby BSSIDs, cell tower IDs & sometimes Bluetooth beacons. >
> 2. Apple
> A. The Apple Wi-Fi Positioning System is openly queryable.
> Researchers have shown it can be used to locate routers worldwide.
> B. Even if you do not own Apple devices, nearby iPhones may upload
> your router BSSID & location, adding your home to Apple's database.
> C. This openness has been exploited in studies to track troop
> movements and to track destruction in war zones.
>
> 3. Google
> A. Google collects similar data but restricts access to its database.
> B. It is not openly queryable in the same way Apple's database is.
> C. Android defaults to "Google Location Accuracy" being on,
> but it can be turned off in settings by intelligent people. >
> 4. Limits of exposure
> A. Neither Apple nor Google databases DIRECTLY contain your name
> B. Neither Apple nor Google databases DIRECTLY contain your address
> C. But that name & address is easily found in USA public databases
> D. Attackers would need to cross-reference BSSID data with public
> records to infer identities from the BSSID tied to GPS location. >
> 5. Privacy risks
> A. Apple openness means outsiders can query Wi-Fi locations globally.
> B. Google restricts queries but still collects the same identifiers.
> C. Both raise concerns about involuntary participation in crowdsourced
> location systems (but intelligent people can turn some of it off). >
> 6. Summary
> Both Apple & Google collect Wi-Fi and cellular identifiers
> Apple & Google claim they do it in order to improve location accuracy.
> Apple allows open queries, Google restricts them.
> Neither exposes your name or device list directly, but both raise
> huge privacy concerns when that information is combined with other data. >
> Bearing in mind intelligent people listen to what Apple & Google say,
> but if you're intelligent, you also notice what Apple & Google do. >
> Which isn't always the same thing.
> There are other motives beyond simply improving location accuracy. > --
> One advantage of owning intelligent thought processes is we can listen to
> what Apple & Google say, but then take into account what they actually do.
But... there are other motives beyond just improving location accuracy.
- Advertising A. Google has long tied location data to advertising. B. Location history and signals from Android devices feed into ad targeting, letting advertisers know where you go and how long you stay there. C. Apple has historically avoided ads in Maps, but reports suggest Apple may add ads to Maps search results similar to Google Maps and Waze. formatting link
- Data monetization A. Apple claims it does not sell personal data, but dozens of iOS apps have been caught selling location data to marketing firms. formatting linkformatting linkformatting linkB. Google uses aggregated location data to power advertising products and analytics for businesses.
- Behavioral tracking A. Both ecosystems can measure dwell time at stores or kiosks if Bluetooth beacons are present. B. This data is valuable for retailers who want to know how long customers linger and what paths they take.
- Policy differences A. Apple introduced App Tracking Transparency, which forces apps to ask permission before tracking across apps and sites. B. Apple also restricts developers from making apps whose primary purpose is location-based advertising. C. Google allows more integration of location data into its ad ecosystem.
- Summary Improving location accuracy is the official reason, but location data is also used for advertising, analytics and behavioral insights.
Apple positions itself as more privacy focused, yet its ecosystem still enables location data monetization through apps.
Google openly integrates location into its ad business. Both companies benefit financially from the collection.