Public emergency alert - being sent to your phone

[Megaflow]

CoolHands said:

Ah


Edit I can’t find the settings in iPhone - can anyone else?

Edt edit it’s here

Go to Settings > Notifications.
Scroll to the bottom of the screen.
Under Government Alerts, turn the type of alert on or off.

Edited by CoolHands on Sunday 19th March 12:45

This is just more st to pander to the bed wetters

[eharding]

I do miss Car Crazy Dad. You just know he'd be all over wanting to disable these alerts, and then a couple of days later be back complaining that he'd been bilked out of a load of BTC by some dodgy bloke whom he met on the internet, who had promised to fix his phone settings for him on account of CCD not knowing his arse from his elbow.

[CoolHands]

bhstewie said:

surveyor said:

I am stunned to be reading so many replies by complete and total idiots. Perhaps I should not be in NP&E.

Is there potential to bring valuable information to the general public? Yep.

Could the government perhaps overuse the system? Yep.

What happens if it annoys you? Turn it off. What happens if it does not and you leave it switched on? Absolutely nothing.

Is it a big deal? Nope!

Quite.

Easy way and hard way.

Some people always do things the hard way.

Instead of being so superior maybe look at what some others have written including gch who has examples or what are not emergencies from the public’s point of view. Curfew is more about wanting to enforce public compliance for the state’s benefit. An emergency for them, maybe. Would Paris be issuing them now?

I’ve experienced ‘floods’ here in London, I’m sure they will come under the emergency weather warning classification. But do they need to? No, is the answer - I just had to avoid the north circ for a few hours, big whoo.

And why would any of us trust (any) government these days? So yes it is an imposition, it will cost money which has rightly been pointed out would be of more use spent on repairing roads, or public parks, or almost anything else.

Still, climate death terror must be reinforced, for our own good!

[Biker 1]

The subject came up at work today. I pointed out an ITV News report about it - none of the 10 people in the room had even heard about it, but having read the article, they all wanted to know if there was a way of disabling the damn thing from their phones. I explained they needed to go to their settings menu, as set out on these hallowed pages, et voila, another 10 people who are so distrusting of ANYTHING our moronic leadership come up with, they all just want to be left alone.
I wonder how much this scheme cost the tax payer, taking into account all the quangos, middle men, consultants, reviews etc? Decent value for money??
Apparently the experiment will take place on 23rd April, Saturday. Will it occur in the morning when everybody's in the supermarket? Will people get glowered at if their phone doesn't make klaxon noises of impending doom, a bit like if you refused to wear a mask during the covid bks mandate?

[xx99xx]

Having been trained to potentially use these alerts (through work), there are various levels of assurance to go through before an alert will get issued.

Only danger to life events that are signed off by cabinet office will get approved and there are strict criteria. This has been years in the making (pre COVID) and I suspect it will be used quite infrequently but it's just another warning and informing tool other than media.

It is indeed linked to cell towers and can be set to repeat after a certain time to grab people who may have moved into the 'danger' area after the initial alert was sent.

[Biker 1]

xx99xx said:

Having been trained to potentially use these alerts (through work), there are various levels of assurance to go through before an alert will get issued.

Only danger to life events that are signed off by cabinet office will get approved and there are strict criteria. This has been years in the making (pre COVID) and I suspect it will be used quite infrequently but it's just another warning and informing tool other than media.

It is indeed linked to cell towers and can be set to repeat after a certain time to grab people who may have moved into the 'danger' area after the initial alert was sent.

Given your understanding of the system, why does ITV article state: 'Phone users will be unable to use other features on their devices unless they acknowledge the alert, due to be sent on Sunday April 23.' https://www.itv.com/news/2023-03-18/mobile-users-t...
I'm no expert, but either that's a typo by ITV or it infers 2-way communication which couldn't possibly true - article continues: 'The Cabinet Office said the alerts are secure, free to receive, and one-way, insisting they do not reveal anyone's location or collect personal data.'

[xx99xx]

Biker 1 said:

Given your understanding of the system, why does ITV article state: 'Phone users will be unable to use other features on their devices unless they acknowledge the alert, due to be sent on Sunday April 23.' https://www.itv.com/news/2023-03-18/mobile-users-t...
I'm no expert, but either that's a typo by ITV or it infers 2-way communication which couldn't possibly true - article continues: 'The Cabinet Office said the alerts are secure, free to receive, and one-way, insisting they do not reveal anyone's location or collect personal data.'

I believe it's the way the thing works on the device. So if an alert remains unacknowledged, you can't access anything else on your phone because the big button in the screen that's says 'ok' or 'accept' disables the rest of the controls until you press it.

It is indeed 1 way and no signal is sent back to wherever. The acknowledgement simply gets rid of the notification on your phone. There is no collection of data as it is just a signal sent from a cell tower to trigger something on your phone. The cabinet office do not have access to the mobile operators data.

Clearly, tin foil hats are being rapidly prepared by some, but from what I know and the length of time it has taken to get the mobile operators to play ball, this isn't some big brother snooping thing.

[Hill92]

Biker 1 said:

Given your understanding of the system, why does ITV article state: 'Phone users will be unable to use other features on their devices unless they acknowledge the alert, due to be sent on Sunday April 23.' https://www.itv.com/news/2023-03-18/mobile-users-t...
I'm no expert, but either that's a typo by ITV or it infers 2-way communication which couldn't possibly true - article continues: 'The Cabinet Office said the alerts are secure, free to receive, and one-way, insisting they do not reveal anyone's location or collect personal data.'

Why do you think that needs two-way communication? It can just be a system notification pop up that requires you to actively to dismiss it (as opposed to a normal notification that you can passively ignore). That's a basic wholly internal feature of any operating system.

[scenario8]

How has it been “years in the making”?

Thanks in advance.

[eharding]

Biker 1 said:

xx99xx said:

Having been trained to potentially use these alerts (through work), there are various levels of assurance to go through before an alert will get issued.

Only danger to life events that are signed off by cabinet office will get approved and there are strict criteria. This has been years in the making (pre COVID) and I suspect it will be used quite infrequently but it's just another warning and informing tool other than media.

It is indeed linked to cell towers and can be set to repeat after a certain time to grab people who may have moved into the 'danger' area after the initial alert was sent.

Given your understanding of the system, why does ITV article state: 'Phone users will be unable to use other features on their devices unless they acknowledge the alert, due to be sent on Sunday April 23.' https://www.itv.com/news/2023-03-18/mobile-users-t...
I'm no expert, but either that's a typo by ITV or it infers 2-way communication which couldn't possibly true - article continues: 'The Cabinet Office said the alerts are secure, free to receive, and one-way, insisting they do not reveal anyone's location or collect personal data.'

It's just a modal dialog that's a bit more system-wide modal than the average dialog box. Seriously, do you think the government is really interested in whether you pressed the 'OK' button or not, on a system that you've disabled anyway?

If you're really worried about being monitored then take your phone outside, pick out your favourite hammer and proceed to smash the living feck out of your mobile, then unplug your internet connection, dump your PC in the bath filled with a 20% bleach solution and then hide in the loft. Compared to the amount of data you're sharing every single second with any amount of corporate (and probably government) entities, the threat posed to your privacy by these alerts is so vanishingly small as to be to non-existent. What has become clear, however, is that the UK Emergency Alert system does seem to be a triggering mechanism for those poor benighted souls suffering from Irritable @rsehole Syndrome.

[eharding]

scenario8 said:

How has it been “years in the making”?

Thanks in advance.

Timeline is here: Wikipedia: UK Emergency Alert System. Early trials since 2013, early contracts for the current system were tendered in 2018.

[xx99xx]

scenario8 said:

How has it been “years in the making”?

Thanks in advance.

I think cell broadcasts (delivered as text messages) were in place a long time ago but rarely used by government, if at all (in the UK). Emergency alerts (more effective with smart phones) has taken a lot of collaboration between government and mobile networks for various reasons, e.g. data security and confidence over appropriate use.

The desire for an effective dissemination system for emergency messages has been there for 20 years or so. It was just a matter of time for emergency alerts to go live in the UK. Other countries use it, others will follow.

[scenario8]

Thanks again.

I must say it’s not immediately obvious how it might have taken a decade or more to get here. Especially since the Brexit and covid experiences indicate there’s the will to give scant regard to lengthy or due process or to bother ourselves with concerns over civil liberties and data protection when in an “emergency”.

[BananaFama]

I "unsubscribed " to smart phones couple of years ago ,I'll just carry on regardless .
Ignorance is bliss

[xx99xx]

scenario8 said:

Thanks again.

I must say it’s not immediately obvious how it might have taken a decade or more to get here. Especially since the Brexit and covid experiences indicate there’s the will to give scant regard to lengthy or due process or to bother ourselves with concerns over civil liberties and data protection when in an “emergency”.

Yes but emergencies are unplanned and the authorities can react how they see fit to manage the emergency in real time i.e. COVID. The plans have been in motion to get an emergency alert system in place for years but it's always been a 'nice to have' thing rather than an essential tool. When you want a system in place for specific uses in future scenarios then it needs to be properly planned and tested, as well as communicated to the public.

[scenario8]

I’m resigned to not understanding government projects. I’ve a lifetime working exclusively for SMEs. It makes no sense to me how something this simple can possibly take years (years and years!) to put in place.

[Disastrous]

bhstewie said:

surveyor said:

I am stunned to be reading so many replies by complete and total idiots. Perhaps I should not be in NP&E.

Is there potential to bring valuable information to the general public? Yep.

Could the government perhaps overuse the system? Yep.

What happens if it annoys you? Turn it off. What happens if it does not and you leave it switched on? Absolutely nothing.

Is it a big deal? Nope!

Quite.

Easy way and hard way.

Some people always do things the hard way.

Whilst I sort of agree it’s no big deal, I think it’s perhaps more useful to think about how we’ve ended up in a situation where confidence in our leadership is so low that this many people are annoyed by what they perceive as further state over-reach?

[RizzoTheRat]

scenario8 said:

I’m resigned to not understanding government projects. I’ve a lifetime working exclusively for SMEs. It makes no sense to me how something this simple can possibly take years (years and years!) to put in place.

Because while its not technically complicated, it needs a lot of people/ organisations to agree to work with each other, and that's the bit that takes the time. Especially with something like this that has the tin foil hatters up in arms and needing more assurances and evidence about how things work.

[768]

xx99xx said:

...cabinet office ... years in the making ...

Sounds about right.

xx99xx said:

scenario8 said:

How has it been “years in the making”?

Thanks in advance.

I think cell broadcasts (delivered as text messages) were in place a long time ago but rarely used by government, if at all (in the UK). Emergency alerts (more effective with smart phones) has taken a lot of collaboration between government and mobile networks for various reasons, e.g. data security and confidence over appropriate use.

I'm curious, what possible data security issue could there be with a public broadcast message?

[CoolHands]

RizzoTheRat said:

the tin foil hatters

More belittling. There’s been no event in my lifetime that we need a warning about, or that had we received one would’ve made any difference to anything. It’s hot. It’s cold. There’s flooding. Don’t tell me, some old granny somewhere has probably died in a flood, even in the uk - this would have saved her?