There are legal requirements for enhanced emergency calling in European cars. Cars must have the ability to alert emergency responders with location data. Don’t expect to be able to disable internet in cars going forward.
The Chinese government at least is not in disguise about their surveillance plans whereas we see it sneaked in into more and more appliances of daily use.
Eh? The EU directives are all above board and documented, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
That said, they do need to be monitored at all time; abusing that location data for different usage is only one piece of legislation away. Which is why it's probably best to not gather this information in the first place.
To invoke Godwin's Law, iirc you are no longer required to fill in your religion anywhere, because the nazi's used records like that to track down Jewish people and others they were after.
This is why these privacy laws are so important, and why the right to be forgotten should be sacred; you should be able to disappear if the governments turn against you.
The right to never be known, in the sense in which I think you must mean it here, is fairly simple to obtain. Stay off the internet and stay off cell networks.
Oh, you mean you want to be able to have your devices send requests to other people's devices and have them respond, but at the same time, you want there to be no record that your device ever did this? Good luck with that.
You read or interpret this wrong. The EU government might be acting in good intention and I acknowledge that. Yet consumer electronics has the means to collect data for profiling like crazy. EU government data privacy acts are weak measures compared to liberal company laws with their seats outside the EU jurisdiction. Freemium will nudge far to many people to give away their data.
An GDPR relevancy outside the EU is just a paper promise.
It is mandatory to have it installed for new cars, but it looks like it can be disabled if the owner prefers to be left alone while dying, instead of calling an ambulance :D
The device is built and tested according to some well-defined specifics; it is not connected to the network, and it is not capable of recording more than 3 positions and send them if an accident occurs, as well as establishing a phone call. Anything else is a violation perpetrated the manufacturer, as well as faking the specific tests that are formulated to check if the device is compliant: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32...
Abuses can always happen, and we should put reasonable checks in place to avoid them. Is the current regulation good enough to minimize the risk of having them? I hope so.
It would still need to respect EU privacy regulations (as any other instrument, of course), which include consent. Nobody is forcing you to be tracked.
I have a new car and no, it can't be disabled. You can only disable tracking by the car company but not emergency calling.
Via IMEI tracking the cell providers have your location data, willingly or not. If you want to travel anonymously you'd better have an oldtimer. I know of lawyers who only visit clients with an old car.
As reported, installation of such device is mandatory (first link), but it does not need to be active. This is why some car manufacturers disable it upon request (see the third link). I mean, BMW and Porche disable that if requested.
Devices that allow tracking when no accident occurred, violate the current regulation. This is stressed multiple times.
"not connected to the mobile phone networks until a serious accident happens"
-- https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/redirection/document/5963
There is even a technical test to check if the device is compliant with the privacy regulations: "Procedure for verifying the lack of traceability of an eCall in-vehicle system", where the "Failure to establish the connection can be attributed to the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system not being registered on the network"
-- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32...
Registering the SIM on the network before an accident occurred could be considered a violation indeed.
Unfortunately, something being legislated does mean nothing. In Germany, there has been Covid location tracking via an app (Luca App) for venues. Despite legislation explicitely forbidding that, police tried and gained access to this data.
My previous car sometimes came up with a warning that eCall currently is not available. I'd attribute that to bad reception which means that connection at least has been tried.
I know, there are plenty of cases (and this is why we should defend our rights and support associations like https://noyb.eu/ in my opinion), but I would object that having an app, running on an always-connected smartphone, which register and share data, poses a potential higher risk than an embedded device with a much smaller task that is tested and validated before being sold on the market. There is almost no data record in this case, thus a leak would have a minimal impact, while a backdoored/tampered/non-compliant hardware would still be problematic, but less likely (hopefully).
Your previous car could have had a non-compliant implementation, but it could be that the system run a passive network scanning from time to time, without trying any connection, just because it would be way faster to connect to a network and send a message if there is an up-to-date list of the compatible available operators. Having a better understanding about the specifics of the various implementation would be interesting. The devil is in the details :)
To connect to cellular (2G/3G/4G/5G), you have to listen for a beacon from a base station. If you don't hear a beacon strong enough, you aren't even allowed to try to connect (as it involves transmitting a connection request).
> Devices that allow tracking when no accident occurred, violate the current regulation. This is stressed multiple times. "not connected to the mobile phone networks until a serious accident happens" -- https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/redirection/document/5963
Note that the linked document applies only to eCall In Vehicle System. Nothing prevent manufacturer to install a second system, using the same or separate modem, and track user's location and actions continuously. If the law requires you to install a GPS receiver and a modem, it would be uncapitalistic not to try to gain some profits from the data.
Sure, so? Is that mandatory? No. Would it require explicit user permission? Yes, as any other device or service in EU. The user or the manufacturer always have the ability to put extra devices which do whatever, if they respect the current regulations. This has nothing to do with having eCall installed by default.
It's all in the quality of the comment. The site guidelines try to help with pointers like this: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
The main things to do are (1) edit out swipes (e.g. "might be hard to understand for $group"), and (2) add enough information to make for a substantive comment.
