The use of location-tracking ads targeted at Americans through smartphones and other devices poses a privacy and intelligence threat, according to the Army general nominated to be the next head of the National Security Agency.
“Ten, 15, 20 years ago we were concerned about what we said on phones. Today, we’re concerned about what our soldiers wear, where they are talking, where they are able to be monitored,” Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
U.S. officials received a jolt from the recent report that Fitbit exercise monitors worn by military personnel had publicized the location of sensitive military installations in the Middle East. But Thursday’s hearing saw lawmakers and Nakasone acknowledge a broader risk.
“It appears that Google and Android send quite a bit of information from their devices back home to the mothership; that means they track very detailed user information and precise locations in order to push people advertisements,” Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said. “How would you view the privacy and counterintelligence threats posed by devices like these Fitbits and smartphones that are tracking locations, revealing patterns of life, and sending them back to corporate headquarters?”
Nakasone agreed with Cotton’s comment that the devices raise “privacy [issues] for our private citizens but counter-intelligence [threat] for our government employees.”
“I think you accurately describe the environment in which we live today,” the general said.
That raises the likelihood of restrictions on the use of smartphones and other popular technologies.
“You have to begin with just understanding what, perhaps, the threats are out there and understanding when is it appropriate that civilians that are working at a place like the National Security Agency or military members within their own formations have their phones or are wearing Fitbits,” Nakasone said. “[Are] there places where they shouldn’t have those things on? And I think that that’s perhaps the most important piece that we have to have a realization and then an understanding of those operational security risks.”
