MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Just take the transmitter out of your shoe after the workout. Problem solved. It is also suggested in the instructions so you do not run down the battery.

That's it, no more exercising!
They will find me....

Without spending any money on any fancy technology I can spy upon anyone who is working out: BY WATCHING THEM WITH MY EYES.

And without anything DB-programming knowledge I can log all of those people into the ultimate database: MY MEMORY!

Christ, did the frskkin' Comic Book Guy write the above article? Oh my god the fat nerd with the laptop can figure out how fast I'm running and be jealous because he weighs 300 lbs. Whoopteeshit.

I'm so scared to jog now I think I'm going to gain weight and become a couch potato over this.

Someone spent a LOT of time and money testing all this out... to do what exactly? See where I am? HELLO! I am here - you can follow me around and see me too! How to I get a cryptomatic suit so that no one can see me either? So someone could see where I am jogging, or walking around the mall... ok - and... ???

Tommy Boy is right. Wouldn't it be easier to...um... look for them?

But for all those blind malcontents out there within 60 feet of a runner, this might get their hopes up, I suppose.

ummm, not to mention the fact that cell phones triangulate your position at all times... you'd have to ditch a lot more than the Nike+ censor to go all-out Enemy of the State style.

My ex-girlfriend has a Nike+iPod attached to her shoes. She still comes over to my house and bothers me. If I set up this sensor and get her unique ID, I can tell when she's coming. My PC can warn me and then automatically turn off all the lights in the house and turn my TV and radio off so it looks like I'm not home.

Thank you Nike+iPod for protecting my privacy.


Also, I can be a source of inspiration to the local joggers.

When they come down my street with a Nike+iPod, I can have my PC alert me. Then I can shout out words of encouragement to them like, "you're running a little faster than yesterday. Good job!"

Technology, some use it for good and some for evil.

Look, there she is.

Who, that girl on the steps?

NO, DAMMIT! The girl on the C9 64 E1 2F!

@Privacy at last... you should get a Zune so you can squirt her.

Ha ha: MW: Brown!

Realistically, anyone who's being tracked by their Nike+iPod transmitter would be tracked some other way if they ditched the Sport Kit. Most people (geeky researchers excepted) don't set up electronic surveillance just for fun. But someone should probably tell James Bond, just to be on the safe side.

hey anyone know where that site watchmactv.com went?

it was a great archive of apple videos, ads, keynotes, and general random content etc

come to think of it, isn't that weird that nearing the debuting of the iTV that the domain name watchmactv.com has gone missing? bought out by apple perhaps???? hmmmm...

Don't you have to be able to see them to be in range?

"Errr excuse me, do you mind if I wave my Windows XP sensor around so I can track you please?"

"Biff!*@? sock@!...*"

"That wasn't necessary..! Look, now you've made me drop my Dell Mz1289c-r series Microsoft Windows XP laptop.."

"He he he"

Hmm...

Anyone who is a serious runner won't be using their really nice running shoes as everyday walk around shoes. They don't want to wear them down quicker which would cause their knees to wear down quicker. In fact even most casual users of the Nike+ ipod wouldn't be wearing their running shoes. It would far more effective for anyone wanting to compromise privacy to hit cell phones, most people who have them have them on them most of the time. These assertions by "experts" though having technical merit have no practical information for either the public or for would be privacy invaders.

Vote for Time’s ‘Gadget of the Year’ (Apple MacBook Pro, Nike+iPod Sport Kit candidates)

Current tallies:
• Apple MacBook Pro - (45%)
• Nintendo DS Lite - (36%)
• Nike + iPod Sport Kit - (8%)
• Sanyo HD1 Digital Media Camera - (3%)
• Logitech VX Revolution Mouse - (2%)
• Logitech Wireless DJ Music System - (2%)
• Garmin StreetPilot c550 - (2%)
• Palm Treo 700w - (2%)

Yep, I think Congress should stop their work and discuss this significant breakthrough.

Geeks with to much time on their hands!

Hmmm. This seems overly alarmist to me. Also, after reading the referenced article and the associated paper, I think the authors are missing out on a significant point.
The Nike+ data itself is very low value data. Encrypting the data doesn't really achieve anything. The 'valueable' data posited in the paper is location information. Encrypting packet payload data does nothing to eliminate unique identifying information of the transmitter. The paper does not address how a protocol could avoid transmitting unique identifying information in the clear.
As far as the value of the location information goes, as others have pointed out, given the 60 foot range of the transmitter, visual detection of the person within 60 feet is sufficient to give you their location.

You can't get someone location with this method. The transmitter only works in a fifty feet radius and you need two different receives to even getting close triangulation.

Given the limited range and two receiver requirement, I think the only application would be to detect that you went by a given location.

As for tracking, I don't think I would call it track if the individual is aways within sight.

If I stand outside your house, I could detect IR signals and determine that you are operating your TV, but could you say I was tracking your TV usage.

If I have cell phone scanner, I can track your incoming and outgoing phone signals and know you are near by me. And, I could hack your GPS phone and have you send to me your location at some interval.

Where will this end.

Get a life!!

It is interesting to know that they can do this, but it should not be alarming. I think that it's a good way to let the industry know that they do need to be concerned about privacy even in gadgets like the Nike+ transmitter. Perhaps the next generation of Nike+ will have some encryption.

I personally don't worry about it too much. If someone wants to find me, I'm there. I only wear my running shoes for running - not every day walking around or even exercising at they gym. Running shoes are only good for a certain number of miles before they break down, so why use those miles up in casual walking about?

So, wouldn't you have to be within 30 feet of the Nike+ sensor to pick it up? Um, forgive me for being naive, but exactly what good does that do anyone, except for helping Privacy at last avoid his ex-girlfriend (assuming she doesn't look up and see the house lights go off)?

This is about the same as having a bell around your neck....

So this stalker needs to get to within 60 feet of me before he can tell where I am???

These are guys who thought they were going to find this great system but it failed so they wrote it up anyway and just gloss over the fact you need to be following me before you know where I am!!!

This research, at it's best, allows a person to track a subject's general location while the subject is on foot. In a surveillance operation, this may give the surveillance team a heads-up as to: a) when the subject is preparing to leave the current area, b) when a subject enters a current area, or c) alert the team to the subject's location in a lost subject situation, i.e. a sensor set up at the mall would let the team know to pick up the surveillance subject at the mall. This would require having sensors set at all the subjects usual locations such as the mall, Starbucks, work, school and home. And, it assumes that the subject is a runner who is always wearing shoes with the Nike+. In a scenario in which someone would be under surveillance they would doubtfully be wearing running shoes all the time. The Nike+ is not small enough to be used as a tracking device when many current technologies far surpass its usefulness.

This technology offers no benefit over more effective surveillance technologies like sight. Nor does it increase the likelihood that someone would be stalked. Anybody who would consider employing this technology would be better served with visual surveillance techniques.

Like they can't track me with my cellphone or gps navigation - On star - Lo Jack

Give it a rest Colombo

This could come in useful by setting these up on a marathon course to keep up with all the runners progress..

Pretty cool

On CNN's website, under Latest News, they have a video link that says "iPod flaw helps stalkers track your every move". This statement is factual incorrect and sensationalistic. This seems like grounds for a libel suit and perhaps something for defamation and material damages due to lost sales. Anyone here a real lawyer?

On the CNN site it also said the story was from their KING5.com affiliate. KING is a Seattle station. Can anyone think of a company nearby Seattle that might benefit from raising wireles security concerns about an iPod? Especially one that might have a new wireless media player that may have security concerns?
Maybe I'm just paranoid

Missed the "Study by Univ. of Washington" bit above.

CNN sucks and has little regard for the facts, so what else is new??

So, someone needed a senior research project for college, CNN jumped on it calling it the end of the world, and democrats freak out. What's new in that and why am I reading it here? Does that mean I could have sold my senior computer science research project to CNN years ago?

I guess I missed the easy money!

This article is flawed. What good is this so called tracking technology if you can't track someone more than a few metres away?

Its not as if it transmists over many miles. Wasted time reading

This "research" was done at University of Washington. The University receives a good deal of monetary support from Microsoft: direct donations, research, and student enrollment. Might this research have been influenced by such financial arrangements? Not balancing the FAQ and other web-available information against other tracking methods lowers the "research" to nothing more than an attack on two well-respected companies. The Professor's at the University of Washington who advised this project should be brought before a review board for disciplinary action. Thinly veiled research such as this must be stopped; attacking people or companies while hiding behind the good name of an upstanding University is repulsive.

Do they get Geo Data off the device? I don't think so..

So you have to be within range of the receiver (60-300ft) + they have to identify you (which is only by a signal).

So your actual location is only a mathematical guess.

How they translate time/distance and (the big one) accurate direction to a point on a map is not very precise. Unless they triangulate your signal...but I don't think they can do that ether.

If anything they are just getting time and distance unless they have a bunch of nodes along a path...data is almost useless for tracking.

Vary your route if your worried, but your cell phones have been doing this for years. Boo!

Jun 05, 09 - 05:32 am Comment from: seetumail

That's really true.I am in favor of the views that have been posted about this website.I was looking for a website of similar nature and finally i found one for myself
Eliza

parking sensor