News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by _djo_ on Saturday December 17, 2022 @03:38AM (#34026011)
This claim keeps being made, but Musk’s aircraft is fully visible in the FAA registry data and doesn’t have an obfuscated ICAO hex code. It wasn’t part of the PIA programme, which is also not something endorsed by the ICAO but only used by the FAA within US borders. When flying abroad an aircraft must use its static ICAO address.

Even if it was there’s still nothing wrong with tracking the aircraft and nothing illegal about people matching the rolling ICAO hex codes to the real aircraft.

It frustrates me that we’ve allowed Musk to completely redefine the conversation around something that was already settled and accepted:

1. Flight tracking data, collected from ADS-B, is legal and publicly available. Aircraft ownership data is public too.

2. Nobody has a right to keeping their aircraft movements private, and aircraft movements != personal movements.

3. After much lobbying the FAA introduced LADD & PIA, but they say outright that it’s not a guarantee of confidentiality and just makes it slightly harder to track an aircraft.

4. PIA temporary ICAO codes can only be rotated every 60 days (going down to 20) and it’s pitifully easy for any aircraft spotter, as have hung around airports for decades, to match a new one to an aircraft registration.

Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by jdong on Saturday December 17, 2022 @05:40AM (#34026642)
>1. Flight tracking data, collected from ADS-B, is legal and publicly available. Aircraft ownership data is public too.

Not legal in Europe.

>2. Nobody has a right to keeping their aircraft movements private, and aircraft movements != personal movements.

While not all aircraft movements are personal movements, many are.

Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by _djo_ on Saturday December 17, 2022 @08:54AM (#34027744)
Again, please provide any substantive evidence for that claim.

Private aircraft are neither private cars nor private phones and have he ever been treated equivalently under EU law.

You’re reasoning through false analogies.

Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by jdong on Saturday December 17, 2022 @09:31AM (#34028037)
It's the general data privacy regulation, it applies generally, to everything. It treats planes, cars and phones in exactly the same way (in that it never specifically mentions any of them).

The GDPR even covers you just writing notes into your diary about what your neighbours have been up to.

Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by Eisenstein on Saturday December 17, 2022 @12:14PM (#34029771)
Is there a precedent for this or are you just interpreting it as what you think makes sense?
Re:Twitter just banned a wave of prominent journalists with ... by rosnd on Saturday December 17, 2022 @01:39PM (#34030741)
What exactly do you mean by precedent?

Yes, there are a plenty of precedents in the usual sense of the word. Such as this case, https://www.enforcementtracker.com/ETid-851

If you're going to argue (like _djo_) that this is not a precedent because it concerns a different type of a vehicle, you're entering into some rather absurd territory.