ADSB, FlightAware, Privacy...

[MuseChaser]

Not understanding this sentiment. Flight Following is between you and the controllers. Not showing up on some public map doesn’t change the level of safety it may or may not provide.

(The folks I’ve known who went down on FF say it certainly sped up SAR response significantly, but that has nothing to do with a public map of their location. The controller handled all that.)

You're correct, Nate. Maybe I'm just not stating things as clearly as I thought I had. Let me try again...

It seems that, if one uses flight following and has ADSB-out, one's detailed flight activities are published to the general public. There are people, including myself, who feel that's a violation of a reasonable expectation of a right to privacy.

If one wishes to regain a modicum of privacy, one method of doing so seems to be avoiding the use of flight following, based upon my experience yesterday. Using flight following is a great, safe, useful practice that should be encouraged. It is discouraging, at least to me, that the use of it results in the publication of my private whereabouts to the entire world. Therefore, there currently exists a fact that DISCOURAGES the use of flight following... and that's a shame. There are still many encouraging reasons to use it, and I will continue to do so... but I will also continue to look for and to lobby for actions that help retain my right to privacy as an American citizen, and for actions that eliminate this discouraging practice so that flight following is more attractive for EVERY pilot.

 

[denverpilot]

It seems that, if one uses flight following and has ADSB-out, one's detailed flight activities are published to the general public. There are people, including myself, who feel that's a violation of a reasonable expectation of a right to privacy.

Ahh I see what you’re saying.

If it makes ya feel any better FF isn’t required at all for publication. I’ve signed up numerous tail numbers I’m interested in with a Flight Aware account and gotten text messages whenever they’re flying.

Used to use it to see how busy the rental twin was to get a feel if it was a good week to schedule stuff in it.

The system didn’t care at all. As long as they launched underneath the DEN bravo I knew when it was airborne.

I did have the courtesy to let the owner know. Wasn’t required though. Definitely not tied in any way to them taking Flight Following.

Usually saw them launch off of out of state airports with any sort of controlled airspace for Part 121 ops also. Wasn’t as consistent. Never really dig into it to see why. Would often get a notice the airplane was enroute on one of those flights somewhere odd many miles from departure and I assumed like you have, that those specifically were when the aircraft was tagged up by a Center controller.

But TRACON data, here anyway, appears to start sending immediately. Whether the airplane is talking to controllers or not. Might be initially triggered by the Tower tagging the aircraft up. Dunno. Would have to test more out of an uncontrolled field.

 

[wsuffa]

ADSB will often show up with or without flight following. I found that my mode S (prior to ADSB) would show about 40% of the time without FF. If a discreet squawk were assigned (e.g. Flight following or DC SFRA) it would show almost all the time.

 

[Ravioli]

And so it goes again that ADS-B has NOTHING to do with Safety. It is Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast.

Safety isn't in its name, Surveillance is. Anyone still unclear on the point?

Yah, I know, tell me again about how much safer people are...

 

[MacFly]

My EchoUAT never shows up anywhere that I've seen unless I file a flight plan or request flight following.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Don't believe I ever discussed what my choice was.. only that it is unfortunate that motivation exists for not using flight following.

The motivation exists because you are choosing it to exist. Anyone who really wanted to know, could have found your n-number via flight aware for any flight you used flight following on. And they could have simply opened a 2nd browser tab and used the n-number to find your name and address. That ability has existed since the day you bought your plane. And its fine that your upset about your privacy now, but why weren't you then? Was your identity really that much safer from anyone intending to do bad things with the info when they had to open a 2nd tab and do 10 extra seconds worth of searching to find it?

 

[EdFred]

The motivation exists because you are choosing it to exist. Anyone who really wanted to know, could have found your n-number via flight aware for any flight you used flight following on. And they could have simply opened a 2nd browser tab and used the n-number to find your name and address. That ability has existed since the day you bought your plane. And its fine that your upset about your privacy now, but why weren't you then? Was your identity really that much safer from anyone intending to do bad things with the info when they had to open a 2nd tab and do 10 extra seconds worth of searching to find it?

That isn't correct. I - and others - had numerous flight following flights pre ADSB that did not show up on FA, whether I was logged in to see position only flights or not. It was luck of the draw on whether it would show or not. Sometimes the 'requirement' was you had to cross a center boundary, and sometimes it didn't. IFR flights almost always showed, but some didn't. You should really get your facts straight before lecturing people with faulty information.

 

[MuseChaser]

....or maybe just stop lecturing people who are just looking for a little help and information. Thanks for responding and saving me the typing time, Ed. Appreciated.

@Juliet Hotel .. You're fine with the system the way it is. I get it. I have no issue with you having different perceptions than me. I don't expect you to view it as I do, nor expect you to understand or feel the same way about privacy as I do. If you don't mind the government making your private activities public and available for indiscriminate worldwide dissemination by private third parties, that's fine and I have no desire to take that option away from you. However, saying that "the motivation exists because I am choosing it to exist," you are simply incorrect. I chose to purchase an airplane, I chose to earn a PPL, and eventually chose to meet the adsb mandate, but in no way, shape, or form, did I choose to have my flight activities published. That "choice" was made for us all. I guess you would be correct to say I allowed it to happen, but the only available alternatives were to either not equip and stay out of rule airspace (which is a non starter for where I fly) or give up flying. Neither of those are acceptable options, so I equipped. If, in your mind, that equates to giving up my rights and desires to try and reclaim some privacy, or being in favor of what I view as in invasion of privacy of law-abiding US citizens, so be it. In reality, it's more like being caught in some intentionally hidden onerous clause buried deep in the fine print of a dishonestly written contract. Yes, I signed it, and yes, I'll abide by it, but yes, I'll also do what I can to rectify anything I feel is unjust.

Do people who live in crime-ridden areas choose to be victims of crimes and need to accept the crimes committed against them, or is it an unfortunate reality due to the location of the home and steps should be taken to reduce the crime?

 

[Juliet Hotel]

\]eventually chose to meet the adsb mandate, but in no way, shape, or form, did I choose to have my flight activities published.

No, you didn't and I'm not claiming otherwise. What you're choosing, is to be upset about it. That is a choice. You can be ok with it or you can have a problem with it, your choice. You have every right to feel the way you feel. But how you feel about it is a choice you decide to make. You are not powerless in that respect. You are also not powerless to configure your airplane ownership under a different name and address. So I don't agree that ADSB decreases safety by motivating people not to use flight following. If someone doesn't want their info on flight following, they are able to make that happen. If they choose not to make that happen, and then choose not to use flight following because of their own feelings on privacy, that is them decreasing their own safety because their own choices.

Go to flight aware and look up N28S and then let me know who owns it and where they live.

 

[MuseChaser]

No, you didn't and I'm not claiming otherwise. What you're choosing, is to be upset about it. That is a choice. You can be ok with it or you can have a problem with it, your choice. You have every right to feel the way you feel. But how you feel about it is a choice you decide to make. You are not powerless in that respect. You are also not powerless to configure your airplane ownership under a different name and address. So I don't agree that ADSB decreases safety by motivating people not to use flight following.

Okay, I can accept most of that. I can "feel" (I prefer "view" or "interpret," as I tend to be a pretty pragmatic, logical person, but OK) that the current situation is a needless and warrantless invasion of privacy, or I can somehow teach myself to happily accept it. Reference my earlier comment about living in crime-ridden neighborhoods. We can disagree on whether this additional surveillance via ADSB and the resulting private activities made public motivates people to not use flight following, but hopefully we can agree that making it less intrusive would FURTHER motivate people to use flight following, thereby increasing safety. Yes?

If someone doesn't want their info on flight following, they are able to make that happen. If they choose not to make that happen, and then choose not to use flight following because of their own feelings on privacy, that is them decreasing their own safety because their own choices.

We're going to end up in a circle here. Requiring additional steps, formation of an LLC or S-corp, significant expense, and paperwork to maintain what should be a default level of privacy (and one of the many wonderful tenets upon which our country was founded) is not really a choice... it's a requirement to do extra work and incur extra expense. Voting is a right. If you had to pay to do so, would you be OK with that because it's still a "choice?"

The simple fact that we have to agree on is that, to SOME degree, ADSB-out and the resulting publication of private citizen's activities erodes one's privacy to at least SOME degree. Whether or not that degree is acceptable, or whether it is a reasonable exercise of governmental authority over the citizens, is of course a matter of debate. We also have to agree that those who view that degree as an unacceptable intrusion or overreach are then tasked with incurring considerable extra expense and time if they wish to counter this increased intrusion, or limit their exposure by not equipping or avoiding flight following. Yes, that's a choice, but an unfortunate one, because neither option is a good one. Those who appreciate and value the privacy afforded us as citizens of this country can't simply make a "choice" to happily accept a decrease in that privacy.

We obviously are from opposite poles philosophically, and debating that portion of the issue isn't acceptable here... and I don't enjoy debate of any kind, to be honest. You seemed to target my views and took exception to them, so I've explained them as best as I can, but there's not much point in further discussion. I opened this thread to find out more about how all of this worked, if there were any measures to remain more private, to help others who may be interested in those issues, and to a certain extent to find out if I was alone in my perceptions. From that standpoint, it has been successful and I thank everyone for their constructive input.

Go to flight aware and look up N28S and then let me know who owns it and where they live.

No, thank you. I extend the right to privacy to others as I wish it extended to me. If you're ever in central NYS, drop me a PM here first. Maybe we'd do better in person.. perfectly willing to try!

Best to you.

 

[chemgeek]

The reality is that Google, social media providers, your bank or your ISP already know more about you than what can be learned by ADSB. I'm not going to stress over my ADSB transmissions.

As they say, change is inevitable, misery is optional.

Let's go flying!

 

[MuseChaser]

.....

Let's go flying!

Now THERE'S a great idea.. unfortunately, today's weather stinks...and we're fast approaching peak fall colors. Hope we get another beautiful day or two before the leaves are knocked off the trees.

 

[Ravioli]

I'm having a bit of trouble squaring the circle of "I'll never fly without it" and "I don't want anyone to know I flew with it." (Paraphrasing both of course)

 

[MuseChaser]

How about squaring "I find a great deal of benefit to it" with "I don't want all the details of my private flights published?" Both statements more accurately represent my statements (if your post was directed at me...) and are much easier to reconcile.

 

[EdFred]

The reality is that Google, social media providers, your bank or your ISP already know more about you than what can be learned by ADSB. I'm not going to stress over my ADSB transmissions.

As they say, change is inevitable, misery is optional.

Let's go flying!

When google makes a website that lets anyone and everyone who wants to know where I am in my car, get back to me. Until then the comparison isn't valid.

 

[denverpilot]

The reality is that Google, social media providers, your bank or your ISP already know more about you than what can be learned by ADSB. I'm not going to stress over my ADSB transmissions.

As they say, change is inevitable, misery is optional.

Let's go flying!

When google makes a website that lets anyone and everyone who wants to know where I am in my car, get back to me. Until then the comparison isn't valid.

Agree with Ed. Knowing “stuff” about you and publicizing your location in real-time via a completely insecure communications channel, aren’t even close to the same things.

Google may have your real-time location if you’re voluntarily using their location services in their duopoly phone OS, but they’re not in the business of publishing it to anybody who looks at a website.

They definitely don’t use insecure communication channels receivable with a $20 SDR dongle.

Which is the real rub in the end. Doesn’t matter in the slightest how much “blocking” one does, a network of SDRs feeding a database and it’s all just busywork / paperwork activity for nothing.

Just hope and pray the psycho you have a restraining order against doesn’t have enough brain cells to spend $20 and plug a USB stick into a laptop with free decoding software so they’ll know down to the minute when you’ll taxi in and be shortly headed to your car in a dark parking lot.

Publicizing locations without the knowledge of who’s requested that data is always a bad idea. Always.

Example: FlightAware should be notifying the N number owner about every query, even if they’re not the only way to get the data. I look forward to the liability lawsuit when someone is actually harmed by their easy access to the data. They’ll claim the government didn’t secure it, though.

FlightAware and such sure make it easier than they should to watch the data though. A user account with a throwaway email address and a VPN means whoever is watching gets to easily maintain THEIR privacy. And it’s way easier to do that than DIY it with a receiver and a laptop. LOL.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Okay, I can accept most of that. I can "feel" (I prefer "view" or "interpret," as I tend to be a pretty pragmatic, logical person, but OK) that the current situation is a needless and warrantless invasion of privacy, or I can somehow teach myself to happily accept it. Reference my earlier comment about living in crime-ridden neighborhoods. We can disagree on whether this additional surveillance via ADSB and the resulting private activities made public motivates people to not use flight following, but hopefully we can agree that making it less intrusive would FURTHER motivate people to use flight following, thereby increasing safety. Yes?

I do not believe the number of people who care is significant at all. But you feel strongly about it and so does Ed so that's two and two is more than zero so touche, you win this round.

We're going to end up in a circle here. Requiring additional steps, formation of an LLC or S-corp, significant expense, and paperwork to maintain what should be a default level of privacy (and one of the many wonderful tenets upon which our country was founded) is not really a choice... it's a requirement to do extra work and incur extra expense.

It costs about $50 to set up an LLC. That level of expense doesn't seem all that significant to me, but I can't argue if you feel differently.

No, thank you. I extend the right to privacy to others as I wish it extended to me.

Looking it up would not intrude on anyone's privacy, that was the point. You will not find the name or address of the owner of the plane on flight aware or through an FAA registration search. It isn't there because the own values their privacy.

 

[MuseChaser]

...
It costs about $50 to set up an LLC. That level of expense doesn't seem all that significant to me, but I can't argue if you feel differently.
..

I seriously looked into it. In my state, between the application fees, the "Notice of intent" publication fees, and the certification of publication fees, it was hundreds of dollars, and the time involved in making all of that happen. I may still do it. If there's a way to do it more cheaply in NY, please let me know... I'd appreciate it.

 

[EdFred]

I do not believe the number of people who care is significant at all. But you feel strongly about it and so does Ed so that's two and two is more than zero so touche, you win this round.

It costs about $50 to set up an LLC. That level of expense doesn't seem all that significant to me, but I can't argue if you feel differently.


Looking it up would not intrude on anyone's privacy, that was the point. You will not find the name or address of the owner of the plane on flight aware or through an FAA registration search. It isn't there because the own values their privacy.

Setting up an LLC yourself doesn't get you any privacy. And you know why it doesn't.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Go to flight aware and look up N28S and then let me know who owns it and where they live.

Harrison Ford. And it's against the RoC to post home addresses of anyone, even non-PoAers, but let's just say somewhere on E*y S*****s Rd.

It's truly scary how much information can be found in pretty short order if you know what you're doing... And there are definitely people that are better at it than I am, like @jesse.

 

[wsuffa]

Publicizing locations without the knowledge of who’s requested that data is always a bad idea. Always.

Example: FlightAware should be notifying the N number owner about every query, even if they’re not the only way to get the data. I look forward to the liability lawsuit when someone is actually harmed by their easy access to the data. They’ll claim the government didn’t secure it, though.

FlightAware and such sure make it easier than they should to watch the data though. A user account with a throwaway email address and a VPN means whoever is watching gets to easily maintain THEIR privacy. And it’s way easier to do that than DIY it with a receiver and a laptop. LOL.

Flightaware is not the issue. As you noted earlier, a $20 SDR stick and free software lets you watch what's in the sky near you without involving Flightaware or any of the other data consolidators. With a rooftop antenna at the house, I can see stuff within a 100 mile radius (depending on their altitude) - including the ones landing at the major commercial airports nearby (I lose those when they are below about 500', and we're talking a radius of 20 miles from my house. Even the local PD helicopters show up, increasing their risk of, well, whatever an evildoer chooses to do.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Harrison Ford. And it's against the RoC to post home addresses of anyone, even non-PoAers, but let's just say somewhere on E*y S*****s Rd.

And did you find that address on the FAA website or via any flight tracking service?

 

[Racerx]

I've never really understood the privacy concerns regarding ADSB. Anyone can see your tail number on the ramp and look up the tail number on the FAA site along with all your info. Heck you can search by make, model, and state without a tail number.

 

[denverpilot]

Flightaware is not the issue. As you noted earlier, a $20 SDR stick and free software lets you watch what's in the sky near you without involving Flightaware or any of the other data consolidators. With a rooftop antenna at the house, I can see stuff within a 100 mile radius (depending on their altitude) - including the ones landing at the major commercial airports nearby (I lose those when they are below about 500', and we're talking a radius of 20 miles from my house. Even the local PD helicopters show up, increasing their risk of, well, whatever an evildoer chooses to do.

FlightAware is part of the issue. As stated they make it easier without any real legitimate business reason to do so.

Nobody unidentified needs free GA tracking, ever. Anybody who needs it for legitimate purposes would gladly pay for it and be willing to be identified as tracking whatever they’re tracking.

Name a legitimate use for tracking GA aircraft that isn’t true of.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

I've never really understood the privacy concerns regarding ADSB. Anyone can see your tail number on the ramp and look up the tail number on the FAA site along with all your info. Heck you can search by make, model, and state without a tail number.

This is my perspective as well. The only thing I understand about it is that I will never understand it. Anyone who really wanted to find my info always could, the ability was always there. They couldn't seen your flight history per say and couldn't track you in real time, but they could alway find your information.

Now, anyone can track you in real time and find all the flights you've made. They would still presumably need a reason to want to do that other than just happening to type randomly type your n-number into the search box. And I think that's the real divide here. There are those who believe there are people out there who are interested in them enough to want to find their n-number and see where they're flying minute by minute for some nefarious reason, and are the rest of us who, just find it hard to believe that anyone could ever find me to be that interesting or could ever want to conspire against me bad enough to go to the trouble to figure out my n-number and spend all day sitting and waiting for me to go fly somewhere so they can monitor it and then go... I dunno, rob my house? Rape my chickens? If they wanted to do any of that, I'm pretty sure they'd just go do it. But these folks seem to believe their data being available via ADSB somehow puts them at much greater risk for it. Shrug.

I have the ability to track every one of my truck drivers in near real time. Where they're driving, how fast they're going, where they've stopped to take a leak etc. In addition, I can also turn on a camera and see them inside their truck in near real time. Are they picking their nose? Are they singing along to their favorite Huey Louis and the News song? I can do all that right from my desk. You know how much time I spend sitting and looking at my drivers drive just to watch them drive? About zero give or take zero. I've got way better things to do with my time.

And I'm not saying that makes me better or smarter than those who have a problem with the surveillance aspect ADSB, I'm just saying it means I will likely never understand it and if I can't understand it, I'm going to have a hard time agreeing that its terrible.

 

[Groundpounder]

I assume all you seekers of privacy don't own smart phones, correct?

 

[Racerx]

This is my perspective as well. The only thing I understand about it is that I will never understand it. Anyone who really wanted to find my info always could, the ability was always there. They couldn't seen your flight history per say and couldn't track you in real time, but they could alway find your information.

Now, anyone can track you in real time and find all the flights you've made. They would still presumably need a reason to want to do that other than just happening to type randomly type your n-number into the search box. And I think that's the real divide here. There are those who believe there are people out there who are interested in them enough to want to find their n-number and see where they're flying minute by minute for some nefarious reason, and are the rest of us who, just find it hard to believe that anyone could ever find me to be that interesting or could ever want to conspire against me bad enough to go to the trouble to figure out my n-number and spend all day sitting and waiting for me to go fly somewhere so they can monitor it and then go... I dunno, rob my house? Rape my chickens? If they wanted to do any of that, I'm pretty sure they'd just go do it. But these folks seem to believe their data being available via ADSB somehow puts them at much greater risk for it. Shrug.

I have the ability to track every one of my truck drivers in near real time. Where they're driving, how fast they're going, where they've stopped to take a leak etc. In addition, I can also turn on a camera and see them inside their truck in near real time. Are they picking their nose? Are they singing along to their favorite Huey Louis and the News song? I can do all that right from my desk. You know how much time I spend sitting and looking at my drivers drive just to watch them drive? About zero give or take zero. I've got way better things to do with my time.

And I'm not saying that makes me better or smarter than those who have a problem with the surveillance aspect ADSB, I'm just saying it means I will likely never understand it and if I can't understand it, I'm going to have a hard time agreeing with it.

Exactly. You find out where and when I've flown. What does that gain you? The only thing that does is show someone who might want to buy your plane that you're flying it regularly. What is the harm in someone knowing a pilot flies his plane places. Google knows where I went to lunch and I'm sure I'll be asked to rate it later. I'm not conceited enough to think some individual cares enough to want to where and when I've flown. The registration info is already public record.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Exactly. You find out where and when I've flown. What does that gain you?

Nothing that I can see. But to those who have a problem with it, its critical information that compromises their rights and their safety. Somehow.

 

[EdFred]

I take in none of you have had a stalker. Get one and then get back to me on how awesome it is for the general public (not employers, not service providers, but any ol' Tom Dick or Harriet) to know where you are at a whim.

When you've had that, more than once mind you, you let me know how you feel about it. Until then, can it.

 

[Racerx]

No links to lives saved cause of ADS-B, because its almost impossible to collect data on something that didn't happen. Also no links to people that got killed from a nut job that used ADS-B to help in their endeavors, because it hasn't happened.

But I have a good friend that is here alive because of it, and there is a good chance he would not have been so lucky without it.

Funny, I was just reading an AOPA magazine article from a few months ago about 2 or 3 instances where ads-B saved people. One was a pilot that ditched going to or from the Bahamas.

 

[Racerx]

I take in none of you have had a stalker. Get one and then get back to me on how awesome it is for the general public (not employers, not service providers, but any ol' Tom Dick or Harriet) to know where you are at a whim.

When you've had that, more than once mind you, you let me know how you feel about it. Until then, can it.

My dog is a stalker. I leave the house and she's figured out how to open the door and find me in a couple seconds. Ads-b is there for other people in the sky and your safety if something happens.

If someone has a stalker and that stalker wants to find you. Theyre going to find you regardless of if you have ads-b or not.

Binoculars and a search on the FAA website can find out the same registration information. I guarantee the death threat guy didn't use flightaware. You want to have a discussion about privacy it starts with the FAA registration n-number lookup tool. You want that removed from public view, no argument here.

 

[Daleandee]

I've always wondered why anyone with my N number can punch it in and know more about me than I'd like them to. ADSB only makes privacy even more difficult and I don't like it but I'm under no illusions these days. Total privacy is pretty much a thing of the past. I carry a smart phone as most people do and I'm aware that it tracks all my movements.

Who might be interested in when and where I fly? Perhaps someone that wants to know when I ain't home so he can come by and pick up a few things or maybe it's the guy that I was a witness against some years ago that got out of the slammer and would like to settle a score ... you never know what kinda strange folks may be interested in your personal life & whereabouts. So be ready to meet strangers, both friend and foe and be kind until you can't.

 

[Racerx]

I've always wondered why anyone with my N number can punch it in and know more about me than I'd like them to. ADSB only makes privacy even more difficult and I don't like it but I'm under no illusions these days. Total privacy is pretty much a thing of the past. I carry a smart phone as most people do and I'm aware that it tracks all my movements.

Who might be interested in when and where I fly? Perhaps someone that wants to know when I ain't home so he can come by and pick up a few things or maybe it's the guy that I was a witness against some years ago that got out of the slammer and would like to settle a score ... you never know what kinda strange folks may be interested in your personal life & whereabouts. So be ready to meet strangers, both friend and foe and be kind until you can't.

Who would have your N number and how would they acquire it? If they have a radio they can hear who's in the pattern and Google or go to the FAA site to find the owner. If someone sees you on the ramp...same thing. If someone wants to do a basic search for a plane type in any state...FAA site. Your information is out there and it was out there long before ads-b. Ok maybe they don't know where I last flew. But what is the gain? My plane is going to outrun any evil doer trying to run me down from the ground.

Did everyone concerned about Ads-b privacy vote libertarian last time around??

The FAA public access portal should be where your concerns are placed.

Do you have Facebook? Linkedin? Own property? All public access. Google your name. You can find an address and phone number far quicker than if you happen to know a guy flies and and wait until he does.

 

[EdFred]

Who would have your N number and how would they acquire it? If they have a radio they can hear who's in the pattern and Google or go to the FAA site to find the owner. If someone sees you on the ramp...same thing. If someone wants to do a basic search for a plane type in any state...FAA site. Your information is out there and it was out there long before ads-b. Ok maybe they don't know where I last flew. But what is the gain? My plane is going to outrun any evil doer trying to run me down from the ground.

Did everyone concerned about Ads-b privacy vote libertarian last time around??

The FAA public access portal should be where your concerns are placed.

Do you have Facebook? Linkedin? Own property? All public access. Google your name. You can find an address and phone number far quicker than if you happen to know a guy flies and and wait until he does.

do those sites tell people where you are real time ? No. Quit using examples that arent comparable. (Ok FB does if you post that you are pooping at taco bell)

 

[Tusayan]

The thing that is stopping Congress from passing a law to tax aircraft owners per mile travelled based on automated data collection is that not every aircraft currently has ADS-B Out. That will come, after we get used to the ‘legitimacy’ of having a system that tracks aircraft movements and identifications for ‘safety’. The game is to put the pieces in place quietly so that one day, fairly quickly, it comes together. The stated motivation will be whatever is in fashion with the masses at that point, and the “moral need” for government to collect from those who dare to travel and not just work and pay taxes, all done in “society’s interest”

Some of the posts above strike me as hopelessly naive.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Who might be interested in when and where I fly? Perhaps someone that wants to know when I ain't home so he can come by and pick up a few things

There is no absolutely no need for them to use ADSB (or even know that you fly) to do that. You're going to leave your house sooner or later, they'll take up a position where they can see that and wait. Or they'll arm themselves and they won't wait.

Kind of like the old argument that keyed locks can be picked. Yeah they can, and I can take the time and put in the effort to learn that. Or I can just take a hammer and break your f*cking window to get myself in your house way quicker with way less effort. Path of least resistance and all that.

or maybe it's the guy that I was a witness against some years ago that got out of the slammer and would like to settle a score ...

Why would that guy want to know when you're flying? Is he going to learn to fly and find a plane and chase you down in the air so he can bump wings with you and knock you out of the sky?

That guy doesn't want to know when you're flying. He wants to know when you're not flying. And he doesn't need ADSB to tell him that, he only needs to come to your house and wait. Again, path of least resistance and all that.

 

[Bob Noel]

FlightAware is part of the issue. As stated they make it easier without any real legitimate business reason to do so.

Nobody unidentified needs free GA tracking, ever. Anybody who needs it for legitimate purposes would gladly pay for it and be willing to be identified as tracking whatever they’re tracking.

Name a legitimate use for tracking GA aircraft that isn’t true of.

Angel Flight and Earth Angel

 

[Salty]

FlightAware is part of the issue. As stated they make it easier without any real legitimate business reason to do so.

Nobody unidentified needs free GA tracking, ever. Anybody who needs it for legitimate purposes would gladly pay for it and be willing to be identified as tracking whatever they’re tracking.

Name a legitimate use for tracking GA aircraft that isn’t true of.

Many fbos use FlightAware to plan for arrivals they would be otherwise unaware of.

 

[wsuffa]

FlightAware is part of the issue. As stated they make it easier without any real legitimate business reason to do so.

Nobody unidentified needs free GA tracking, ever. Anybody who needs it for legitimate purposes would gladly pay for it and be willing to be identified as tracking whatever they’re tracking.

Name a legitimate use for tracking GA aircraft that isn’t true of.

FBO planning for arrivals, timing a pickup at the airport (BTDT regularly when I was flying for big company), XYL/Admin awaiting your arrival, Angel Flight, folks headed for a fly-in or meetup, for routing planning knowing the types of aircraft assigned a route, and the ever popular gawking/guffawing at pilots that choose to draw penises in the sky. There's always internet forum crash speculation, too. And LEO, though there are ways for them to get a feed otherwise - it's just easier to pull it off an open forum. If Flightaware weren't doing it, there are others that do/would.

If I'm an evildoer, I'm going to use something that outright can't be tracked: an SDR and open-source software. Remember that anything on the internet can be tracked, and that includes Flightaware access (and I'd bet that their analytics have a lot more info on who's watching that can be obtained with appropriate warrants).

As for encryption of the ADSB feed: this grew out of Mode-S (hence the -ES designation for 1090), which is not encrypted. Encryption adds overhead and introduces a significant barrier: management of encryption keys. The concept of ADSB is to allow transponders on aircraft to talk to each other - each may be a different make and almost all are different owners... a ground network wasn't required (it exists to feed the traditional ATC system, which the long term planners would like to go away). So using encryption makes everything incompatible unless the key exists on the receiver of all aircraft, and if it does then it's public, and we're right back to where we are now.

The problem is akin to encryption on APCO 25 systems in mutual aid: who has the keys and who manages them - the radio and administrative folks are not handing the keys out to every VFD or Sheriff within 100 miles that might respond in a mutual aid situation, hence unencrypted channels. Much as most public safety folks would like to put Broadcastify out of business, the fact remains that they can't encrypt stuff that might be used in a mutual aid situation. Might not be a problem where you are, but certainly a problem here where we have a pretty tightly-knit mutual aid pact (which got even closer after 9/11).

 

[denverpilot]

FBO planning for arrivals, timing a pickup at the airport (BTDT regularly when I was flying for big company), XYL/Admin awaiting your arrival, Angel Flight, folks headed for a fly-in or meetup, for routing planning knowing the types of aircraft assigned a route, and the ever popular gawking/guffawing at pilots that choose to draw penises in the sky. There's always internet forum crash speculation, too. And LEO, though there are ways for them to get a feed otherwise - it's just easier to pull it off an open forum. If Flightaware weren't doing it, there are others that do/would.

None of those are legitimate purposes that need an anonymous way to watch or not to be identified as listeners.

Bad information protection behavior because “someone else will do it” also isn’t a legitimate excuse for FA.