Would you install and use an NHS Covid tracking app?

[edh]

bhstewie said:

Interesting

NHS in standoff with Apple and Google over coronavirus tracing

Yes - looks like NHSX are hoping to create a monster app that no-one will use instead of one that might have a chance of working.

[pip t]

edh said:

bhstewie said:

Interesting

NHS in standoff with Apple and Google over coronavirus tracing

Yes - looks like NHSX are hoping to create a monster app that no-one will use instead of one that might have a chance of working.

Hmm. This was always my fear with this, and why I prefaced pretty much anything I’ve said about it with ‘if the Apple/ Google idea is implemented as published.’

At the end of the day though, the article is correct - if NHSX persists with it’s plans, Apple particularly will just not allow the app to use the API, which would essentially neuter it by removing background access to the Bluetooth stack. Under those circumstances, for the app to work it would have to be active and on screen. As soon as you used anything else or locked the phone, it would stop working.

Apple/ Google really do hold all the cards on this one. NHSX either acquiesces, plays by the rules and gets to use the API, or they don’t and have to develop their own system using GPS based tracking, with all the horrors that entails.

Apple is a known privacy hawk, and Google increasingly, though not always convincingly, likes to claim it is these days. You can bet your life any govt created tracking app will be vetted pretty thoroughly before it’s allowed into the App Store/Play Store.

Edit - it’ll also be interesting to see if they stick with the commitment to open source the app.

Edited by pip t on Sunday 19th April 01:31

[purplepolarbear]

Does anyone involved with electronics manufacturing know how quickly we could design and get into production at scale a wristband type of device that has red, amber and green LEDs to indicate your risk, a button to press if you're not feeling well, a number that doctors could read and enter if you are diagnosed with or without the infection, a cellular modem and SIM card to get the status of devices that have been near you from a central server and report yours and some custom electronics to work out range to nearby devices (probably using something other than bluetooth designed for the purpose which can work out range more accurately).

This would avoid issues of people not having smartphones, reduce security concerns (you would get a device and use it and never "register" it) and using something instead of bluetooth that can more accurately work out range would give more accurate risk estimates. I suspect creating a prototype would be easy but it would be impossible to manufacture enough such devices quickly enough however but would be happy to be proven wrong.

[grumbledoak]

purplepolarbear said:

Does anyone involved with electronics manufacturing know how quickly we could design and get into production at scale a wristband type of device that has red, amber and green LEDs to indicate your risk, a button to press if you're not feeling well, a number that doctors could read and enter if you are diagnosed with or without the infection, a cellular modem and SIM card to get the status of devices that have been near you from a central server and report yours and some custom electronics to work out range to nearby devices (probably using something other than bluetooth designed for the purpose which can work out range more accurately).

Because that's not at all Orwellian. You wouldn't be allowed to take them off. Ever.

Soon after, the Facebook "Lock Everyone Up" brigade would be forming mobs, forcing people in the streets to show their LEDs, and stoning those showing red.

[bitchstewie]

pip t said:

Hmm. This was always my fear with this, and why I prefaced pretty much anything I’ve said about it with ‘if the Apple/ Google idea is implemented as published.’

At the end of the day though, the article is correct - if NHSX persists with it’s plans, Apple particularly will just not allow the app to use the API, which would essentially neuter it by removing background access to the Bluetooth stack. Under those circumstances, for the app to work it would have to be active and on screen. As soon as you used anything else or locked the phone, it would stop working.

Apple/ Google really do hold all the cards on this one. NHSX either acquiesces, plays by the rules and gets to use the API, or they don’t and have to develop their own system using GPS based tracking, with all the horrors that entails.

Apple is a known privacy hawk, and Google increasingly, though not always convincingly, likes to claim it is these days. You can bet your life any govt created tracking app will be vetted pretty thoroughly before it’s allowed into the App Store/Play Store.

Edit - it’ll also be interesting to see if they stick with the commitment to open source the app.

Edited by pip t on Sunday 19th April 01:31

I can't see it going the NHSX way simply because the requirement (phone limitation) that means it only works when the phone screen is on with the app in the foreground renders it literally useless IMO.

[Zirconia]

Govey wovy saying it is in beta on the Marr show.

Being coy though. Based on his performance defo no now. Uncertain link to usage and release from lockdown rather worrying.

[pip t]

purplepolarbear said:

Does anyone involved with electronics manufacturing know how quickly we could design and get into production at scale a wristband type of device that has red, amber and green LEDs to indicate your risk, a button to press if you're not feeling well, a number that doctors could read and enter if you are diagnosed with or without the infection, a cellular modem and SIM card to get the status of devices that have been near you from a central server and report yours and some custom electronics to work out range to nearby devices (probably using something other than bluetooth designed for the purpose which can work out range more accurately).

This would avoid issues of people not having smartphones, reduce security concerns (you would get a device and use it and never "register" it) and using something instead of bluetooth that can more accurately work out range would give more accurate risk estimates. I suspect creating a prototype would be easy but it would be impossible to manufacture enough such devices quickly enough however but would be happy to be proven wrong.

There’s two problems with that.

a) As has been pointed out, the social surveillance aspect of it. It has very, very Orwellian overtones.

b) The ‘something instead of Bluetooth’ you refer to doesn’t really exist, certainly not in a scalable form that could be put in a wristband. The only other real option is GPS, which doesn’t work indoors, only works accurately enough outdoors in perfect conditions, and has the privacy implications of being a geographical location tracker.

Zirconia said:

Govey wovy saying it is in beta on the Marr show.

Being coy though. Based on his performance defo no now. Uncertain link to usage and release from lockdown rather worrying.

Interesting that it’s in beta stage. That’s a relatively advanced stage of development meaning the Guardian article is either false or very out of date. Meaning a decision must have been made over whether to use the API and accept the limitations imposed or to go their own way. We’ll soon see I guess! Unless Gove doesn’t understand what ‘beta testing’ means and is using it as a synonym for experimental...

[Zirconia]

pip t said:

Interesting that it’s in beta stage. That’s a relatively advanced stage of development meaning the Guardian article is either false or very out of date. Meaning a decision must have been made over whether to use the API and accept the limitations imposed or to go their own way. We’ll soon see I guess! Unless Gove doesn’t understand what ‘beta testing’ means and is using it as a synonym for experimental...

iPlayer Marr show 59:01

[pip t]

Zirconia said:

iPlayer Marr show 59:01

Hmmm. Yeah, that doesn’t fill me with huge confidence. Dodging questions, completely ignored the question around would the app be compulsory.

At the end of the day we’ll have to wait and see what it looks like when/if it’s released. And on installation, pay really flippin close attention to what permissions it asks for

I think to be honest it’s difficult to make it compulsory. Not everyone has a smartphone. Even if you manage to persuade the people who don’t have one out of preference to buy one, you’ll have people who straight up can’t afford one. Remembering that the app (if Apples/Google’s version) requires Bluetooth LE, which means it’ll have to be at max 4 years old, and if it’s at the older end of the age range, a high end phone.

Edited by pip t on Sunday 19th April 11:48

[Zirconia]

Part of the issue for me was the other metrics he mentioned and a rather vague application. I think they are trying to make it too complicated from his vague answers, tie in much info and thus, for me, create a big privacy problem.

[pip t]

Other metrics? I’ve just re-watched it and I can’t see anywhere he mentions other metrics?

[grumbledoak]

Zirconia said:

Part of the issue for me was the other metrics he mentioned and a rather vague application. I think they are trying to make it too complicated from his vague answers, tie in much info and thus, for me, create a big privacy problem.

Of the three entities involved, the one I would trust least with my personal data is the NHS. Which is really saying something when one of them is Google.

[Zirconia]

pip t said:

Other metrics? I’ve just re-watched it and I can’t see anywhere he mentions other metrics?

It was part of the conversation not a direct reference, 59:56 I think he talks of other data as part of the let up for a lock down but part of the answer to a Q from Marr on the app being downloaded. A roundabout way as I read it.

grumbledoak said:

Of the three entities involved, the one I would trust least with my personal data is the NHS. Which is really saying something when one of them is Google.

My irony-o-meter went off the scale when Google said not enough protection.

[anonymous-user]

pip t said:

...you’ll have people who straight up can’t afford one....

Don't worry they've all got one already

[pip t]

Zirconia said:

pip t said:

Other metrics? I’ve just re-watched it and I can’t see anywhere he mentions other metrics?

It was part of the conversation not a direct reference, 59:56 I think he talks of other data as part of the let up for a lock down but part of the answer to a Q from Marr on the app being downloaded. A roundabout way as I read it.

Ah ok, I took that to mean other metrics apart from the app.

Zirconia said:

grumbledoak said:

Of the three entities involved, the one I would trust least with my personal data is the NHS. Which is really saying something when one of them is Google.

My irony-o-meter went off the scale when Google said not enough protection.

Yes, when Google is concerned about data collection..... Having said that, they are desperately trying to bolster their privacy credentials these days, so I can see them being as hot as Apple in this regard on this one.

fblm said:

pip t said:

...you’ll have people who straight up can’t afford one....

Don't worry they've all got one already

Not necessarily....there's also a question of the spec of the phones involved. For the Apple/ Google thing to work, they have to be running iOS 13 on the Apple side, and Android 6 or newer on the Android side. They also need Bluetooth LE rather than old school Bluetooth. Essentially that means a phone a maximum of 4 years old, and the older it is, the higher spec for it's time it'll have needed to be.

[bitchstewie]

pip t said:

Not necessarily....there's also a question of the spec of the phones involved. For the Apple/ Google thing to work, they have to be running iOS 13 on the Apple side, and Android 6 or newer on the Android side. They also need Bluetooth LE rather than old school Bluetooth. Essentially that means a phone a maximum of 4 years old, and the older it is, the higher spec for it's time it'll have needed to be.

One of the 2FA apps we use at work has a basic dashboard of what OS the phones using the app are running.

We have a diverse workforce but the number of old versions of iOS and Android running on peoples phones is eye-opening.

Not sure whether it's eye-opening around peoples hardware refresh cycles or their security habits around updates but still seems relevant to how widespread an app like this could be used.

[Zirconia]

It is interesting when you read a forum on some OS or another and the amount that are still a few releases behind because they have some percieved beef with a function being removed or altered feature because someone else said it runs slow.

Personally I run Beta on everything apart from first release unless the first release reports are good. Though my iPad is too old for 13, my phone might be stopped at some point soon and the new SE looked a dead cert till someone mentioned the battery. I think if they want to electronic this then fitbit or something perhaps.

pip t said:

Ah ok, I took that to mean other metrics apart from the app.

With Gove especially, I perhaps read too much into it but you know, Gove, [Kryten]Engage spin reading mode[/Kryten]

Edited by Zirconia on Sunday 19th April 14:24

[Jonesy23]

grumbledoak said:

purplepolarbear said:

Does anyone involved with electronics manufacturing know how quickly we could design and get into production at scale a wristband type of device that has red, amber and green LEDs to indicate your risk, a button to press if you're not feeling well, a number that doctors could read and enter if you are diagnosed with or without the infection, a cellular modem and SIM card to get the status of devices that have been near you from a central server and report yours and some custom electronics to work out range to nearby devices (probably using something other than bluetooth designed for the purpose which can work out range more accurately).

Because that's not at all Orwellian. You wouldn't be allowed to take them off. Ever.

Soon after, the Facebook "Lock Everyone Up" brigade would be forming mobs, forcing people in the streets to show their LEDs, and stoning those showing red.

I was thinking that sounds more like Logan's Run life-clocks, soon to be followed by Carrousel and Sandmen.

[pip t]

Interesting article in Wired on this, examining some of the problems with it.

https://www.wired.com/story/apple-google-contact-t...

Interesting to note that the inclusion of GPS/ other metrics in each health authority’s end app would merely be against ‘policy’ - no real indication of whether this would be enforced or not.

Edited by pip t on Monday 20th April 01:55

Edited by pip t on Monday 20th April 01:56

[Zirconia]

It does raise the issue of governments. Say Russia decides everyone must have it, but the app is tailored for the government or Apple and Google can get out to Dodge, same for China, probably a few others would go that far? That change is they scrape all your info for example. You don't come in the country without the app, everyone in the country with a device must have the app under the pretence of health of the nation.

Another bit is deciding to work out in a group of people who has the app running (tickled in the article). Some of the work done at Bletchley in WWII didn't always rely on decoding directly, traffic rate increasing in an area of forest or traffic where there was none before were often used in the item given to the Ultra reports.

Often the intended use can be exploited by the nefarious. I suppose this is where the Apple and Googles are going to have to step up or lose profit (to be blunt).