/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Researchers develop a protocol to secure AirTags against stalking while maintaining privacy, aiming to improve on Apple's system of rotating public identifiers

Lily Hay Newman / Wired :

Wired Lily Hay Newman

Context & Ripple Effects

AirTags’ safety design has been contested since launch: Apple described built-in protections in 2021, but people who said they were tracked argued the safeguards were inadequate. Apple subsequently outlined earlier alerts, louder sounds, and Precision Finding for unknown AirTags.

The new research shifts the discussion from tuning notifications toward whether the underlying identifier design can better balance location privacy with abuse detection. It follows the researchers’ proposed privacy-preserving anti-stalking protocol and targets a limitation of rotating public identifiers.

First-order effects

  • Apple and tracker-system designers gain a concrete technical alternative to evaluate against identifier rotation, rather than relying solely on alert timing and audible warnings.
  • Researchers and privacy advocates get a framework for assessing whether anti-stalking protections can be strengthened without making item-tracking identifiers broadly linkable.

Second-order effects

  • If adopted or validated, the approach could force competing item-finder networks to compare their privacy protections at the protocol level, not just through user-facing safety features.
  • A more robust technical standard could reduce the trade-off between protecting owners’ location data and helping potential stalking targets identify unwanted trackers.

Third-order effects

  • If this line of work is deployed across tracker ecosystems, anti-stalking safeguards may become a core interoperability and product-design requirement for dual-use location tools rather than a post-launch mitigation.
  • The outcome remains uncertain: a research protocol must still be tested for deployability, usability, and resistance to misuse before it can displace existing safeguards.

The trend: Item-tracking platforms are moving toward privacy-preserving safety architectures that address abuse risks in the network protocol itself.

Discussion

  • @lhn@mastodon.online Lily Hay Newman on mastodon
    An even more cryptographically private approach Apple (and Google and Tile etc) could take to reduce AirTag stalking/abuse while still maximizing the anonymity of legitimate devices.  Also includes choice bonus content of @matthew_d_green just loving cryptography so much https://…
  • @utxoclub Nick on x
    Really interesting application of secret sharing to airtag privacy. On short timescales devices are transient, indistinguishable and difficult to track. But after spending enough time in proximity to a particular device, you learn to identify it from the crowd.
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    The solution we developed uses “secret sharing.” Each device has a long-lived secret, but instead of broadcasting that, it broadcasts a “share” of its secret every few minutes. If any receiver obtains a sufficient number of shares, they can put them together and detect the tag.
  • @zkproofs Pratyush Mishra on x
    This style of work is really applied cryptography at its best: solves real problems with cool but still efficient cryptography
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    (Apple and Google are working on a joint IETF standard that will mandate this lower level of privacy. Here's the relevant section.) https://datatracker.ietf.org/ ... [image]
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    Two years later, Apple introduced the AirTag. At this point they noticed a problem: people were using location trackers to stalk victims, by placing them on victims' possessions or cars. This led to several murders. https://arstechnica.com/...
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    TL;DR thread. When Apple launched their “Find My” system for lost devices in 2019, they designed a clever solution to keep bad actors (including Apple) from tracking users. This works by making devices change their broadcast identifier every 15 minutes. https://blog.cryptographye…
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    Article on some new research that finds ways to balance privacy and stalker detection for AirTags and other location trackers. This is a collaboration with my students @gabrie_beck, Harry Eldridge and colleagues Abhishek Jain and Nadia Heninger. https://www.wired.com/...
  • @matthew_d_green Matthew Green on x
    There is a lot more to this, obviously. For a full description of the work, here is our pre-print: https://eprint.iacr.org/... Even if this is not the solution Apple et al. adopt, I hope they will consider improving the privacy guarantees of these devices. //fin