[abwizz]

bt is flaky enough as it is ;)

but yea, fwiw bt mac addresses are NOT randomized on google and apple platforms and serve as a constant identification provider for anyone that cares (e.g. retailers).

wifi macs are randomized for a few years now (settings toggle in hostapd.conf)

[jmole]

BT addresses are not randomized because it would break all existing BT headphones and the pairing process.

Both Apple and Google, as far as I know, will randomize MAC for BLE on Android and iOS when possible. Ditto for Wifi MAC, but it’s usually only randomized on a per-AP basis.

But that doesn’t prevent tracking via BLE accessories (e.g. heart rate monitors, older smart watches, etc.) which may periodically broadcast with the same MAC address indefinitely.

[abwizz]

blood sugar monitors are rather popular as well

[ChrisMarshallNY]

Apple randomizes BT, as well[0].

[0] https://support.apple.com/guide/security/bluetooth-security-....

[abwizz]

my take from this document is that it is enabled for the low-energy variant but not the normal bt (with more reach).

care to verify?

my 1st-gen se with ios 15.whatever does NOT randomize the mac address in normal bt probes

[ChrisMarshallNY]

That is correct.

But all my [modern] Apple devices randomize (except my old SE, which is my low-end test). It can be a pain to track, with my software.

BLE is probably where all of Bluetooth is going, eventually.

The main issue, now, is data speed, but even classic is pretty slow, compared to other standards. I believe they are incorporating high data-rate stuff into BLE, so you can have things like pure BLE headphones.

[abwizz]

so, there are cases where btle does randomize the mac address, but not when using 'normal' bluetooth things

[ChrisMarshallNY]

BLE is "ad hoc," with ephemeral, one-time connections, while Classic establishes long-lasting, "commitments."

BLE is like a Gig.

Classic is more like a Career.