[hedora]

This seems dead on arrival to me. The feature provides no benefit to end users, but severely reduces the legitimate functionality of the product. (For instance, this makes the products useless for preventing luggage theft.)

At the same time, even if 99.9% of trackers have this built in, it still won’t prevent malicious use cases.

Anyway, I’m hoping it will be dead on arrival, but I fear that corrupt law enforcement organizations will try to get this mandated, since it will let them continue to steal luggage, and avoid dealing with people that would like their stolen items to be recovered.

[ajb]

Depends who you call an end user. These devices can't do anything on their own, they piggyback on the network of nearby phone users. If one is tracking you, it's likely using your phone, even if the actual owner is a stalker who's trying to figure out when you are in a secluded spot. Arguably, phone owners should get some kind of say in how this works.

[gruez]

>Arguably, phone owners should get some kind of say in how this works.

You as the phone owner can refuse to relay the tracker, but you shouldn't be able to disable it

[hedora]

If one is tracking me, you’re right, but the probability of that is low.

If one I own is tracking someone else, either they know it, and are OK with it, or they stole my stuff. The probability of this is at least 100x higher.

The vast majority of the market are people like me, and (unless they outlaw fleet management equipment and stolen property trackers) the criminals can and will be able to buy things that are better for stalking.

Edit: By better for stalking, I mean these trackers probably have battery lives measured in months, not years, and probably aren’t rated for being magnetically attached to a wheel well or vehicle undercarriage. I doubt they even have an option for wiring into automotive 12V. On top of that, they’re not going to provide the stalker with high time resolution traces of where they’ve been for the last year.