Contact Tracing Tech/Applications

Emmo-m-

Hi guys,

I'm wondering has anyone got info on whether the government are using any new technology to help fight the spread of COVID-19 similar to other countries like Singapore , where new tech and apps have helped specifically with contact tracing.

I found this article on our current procedures but no mention of any tech :

https://www.thejournal.ie/contact-tracing-explainer-5034547-Mar2020/

I doubt there is any direct line of contact with anyone from the HSE or government to check such info but would be great to find out.

Stay safe folks.

donaghs

Emmo-m- wrote: »

Hi guys,

I'm wondering has anyone got info on whether the government are using any new technology to help fight the spread of COVID-19 similar to other countries like Singapore , where new tech and apps have helped specifically with contact tracing.

I found this article on our current procedures but no mention of any tech :

https://www.thejournal.ie/contact-tracing-explainer-5034547-Mar2020/

I doubt there is any direct line of contact with anyone from the HSE or government to check such info but would be great to find out.

Stay safe folks.

Probably better to have a reliable testing system in place first?

Xertz

They’d an app under development.

Google and Apple are due to launch joint platform and APIs

There’s a fight going on with the U.K., France and Germany who want to have the devices run constant Bluetooth scanning. Apple in particular won’t open they as they’re concerned about abuse and use for other purposes - such as tracking people for other reasons etc. It’s possible with android but Google seems to be supporting the position too.

So the agreed platform seems to be the only way way to go.

Launching a contract tracing app without iOS in Ireland would be totally pointless given iOS market share here.

Also using Apple and Google Android native capabilities and building on their API makes a hell of a lot of sense in terms of getting an App that works reliably.

https://www.businessinsider.com/france-uk-apple-contact-tracing-apps-2020-4

robinph

Any idea what it is that the governments are trying to get extra that Google and Apple don't want to give up?

plodder

robinph wrote: »

Any idea what it is that the governments are trying to get extra that Google and Apple don't want to give up?

I think they want the ability for the app to run in the background while accessing bluetooth all the time. Usually, apps in the background are suspended after a short time to preserve battery.

robinph

plodder wrote: »

I think they want the ability for the app to run in the background while accessing bluetooth all the time. Usually, apps in the background are suspended after a short time to preserve battery.

That's not really a security concern, just highlighting of poor battery life.

plodder

robinph wrote: »

That's not really a security concern, just highlighting of poor battery life.

Yes, but you didn't ask about security concerns.

robinph

Although Android doesn't have a problem with bluetooth running permanently in the background, so why they have a problem with it now is odd?



I would guess that the governments are wanting to link the phone ID's back to their national ID systems which would then be a security problem and also an issue with how do you get the government to then give up that information afterwards about whose phone relates to which person and their health/ work/ tax/ everything else that governments hold about us information.

A database of which bluetooth ID's have been in contact with which other bluetooth ID's and then a way of sending out a message to any relevant handsets is kind of OK and anonymous to an extent and doesn't actually show location information...unless the government get access to the whole listing of bluetooth ID's and where they all had contact you could approximate a trace of where people had been.

Once a person who is tested +ive they then give up their anonymity at that point because their personal ID and their handset are then linked together. Who holds that data? And how do you get them to delete it and not link it back to any of their other databases?



If it's just about battery life though then Apple should get over themselves and admit the battery life is rubbish.

plodder

Some info about the UK app at the link below. Looks like they are going their own way and have found a way to get around the limitation, at a possible cost in increased power consumption.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52441428

I can imagine that Apple and Google are concerned about opening up these capabilities not just from a power consumption point of view, but what others could do with the same capabilities could be concerning.

For instance, I presume that all of these "official" contact tracing apps will use anonymised identifiers when broadcasting over the air, but other apps which make use of the same capability might not be as careful as that.

Then you have the data protection concern with respect to contact tracing apps themselves, which is a different issue again.

robinph

For Android it's already possible to have the Bluetooth permanently on, and it uses very little power. In the background my Android is permanently communicating with sensors and watches through various apps, and then it's also communicating with other Bluetooth devices that are not mine in order to allow tracking of other peoples lost devices such as key fobs that they have lost*. So they are not concerned about that...other than possibly giving government the data rather than other commercial entities which they already do.

Government = bad, company = good.



*Someone loses their keys, they mark that bluetooth device lost in their app, that ID gets uploaded. My phone wanders past their keys, my phone connects to their key fob, I have no knowledge of their key fob existing, my phone uploads the location that it spotted a random key fob, their app tells them the approximate location that someone unknown wandered past their keys, they can then go to the general area and search for their keys. Neither of us know who the other was at any point, and I don't know that I ever connected to their key fob.

kippy

Can anyone tell me what is the point of developing these type of apps when they plainly rely on everyone having a smartphone, with internet access, bluetooth, the app installed, the relevant permissions assigned by the user for them to be any way effective? (Which is never gonna happen)
Should resources be put into apps and tech that might actually be useful (tbf I realise this is ongoing as well)

robinph

kippy wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what is the point of developing these type of apps when they plainly rely on everyone having a smartphone, with internet access, bluetooth, the app installed, the relevant permissions assigned by the user for them to be any way effective? (Which is never gonna happen)
Should resources be put into apps and tech that might actually be useful (tbf I realise this is ongoing as well)

Nobody knows yet because it's not been tried before.

But every country it trying something and one country might hit it lucky. Might be that it's only effective in young populations in major metropolitan areas, in which case you target them to get better uptake of the app, and with the older population living in the suburbs and working from home you don't worry about with the app, instead focusing on more manual tracing.

If it enables you to get the population of the city back to work and using public transport though then it's useful. If part of that is then quickly spotting that there is an outbreak about to kick off amongst users of a certain underground line then the next day you just make a convenient "engineering works" on that line and connecting ones in order to force a few more people who don't have the app to stay at home as well. It's going to need some quick moving responses and very localised shut downs and re-opening of services and work places to handle things without keeping everyone at home permanently.

scamalert

robinph wrote: »

Nobody knows yet because it's not been tried before.

But every country it trying something and one country might hit it lucky. Might be that it's only effective in young populations in major metropolitan areas, in which case you target them to get better uptake of the app, and with the older population living in the suburbs and working from home you don't worry about with the app, instead focusing on more manual tracing.

If it enables you to get the population of the city back to work and using public transport though then it's useful. If part of that is then quickly spotting that there is an outbreak about to kick off amongst users of a certain underground line then the next day you just make a convenient "engineering works" on that line and connecting ones in order to force a few more people who don't have the app to stay at home as well. It's going to need some quick moving responses and very localised shut downs and re-opening of services and work places to handle things without keeping everyone at home permanently.

even if app was tied to pps number, wonder how long will take for some kids to figure out setting random phone and putting active case in school will buy em months off free time, if person is sick and in public surely they wont be stupid to declare that, since they should be in isolation for their own sake if tested positive. thus aside setting time off for those that will decide to get time off work or schools etc, sounds like recipe for disaster, specially if notifications would be broadcast in real time :pac:

robinph

scamalert wrote: »

even if app was tied to pps number, wonder how long will take for some kids to figure out setting random phone and putting active case in school will buy em months off free time, if person is sick and in public surely they wont be stupid to declare that, since they should be in isolation for their own sake if tested positive. thus aside setting time off for those that will decide to get time off work or schools etc, sounds like recipe for disaster, specially if notifications would be broadcast in real time :pac:

About 30 seconds after the app is released at a guess. How they are going to deal with the self declaration of being ill getting sent out I've yet to see a fix for.

kyote00

Bluetooth is a horribly inconsistent and unreliable way to do this proximity checking. Its next to useless.....

I could be in a bus passing by and still be picked up as in proximity. Alternately I could have phone in my bag on/in the bus/train/plane/shop/park - be sitting next to you by have the RSSI so low that app thinks we are not in contact.

As far as I read, China/Wuhan use an 'app' but its based on a unique id and QR/bar code to allow access into various venues based on whether you have been tested

plodder

kyote00 wrote: »

Bluetooth is a horribly inconsistent and unreliable way to do this proximity checking. Its next to useless.....

I could be in a bus passing by and still be picked up as in proximity.

It's only going to register when you are near the other device for several minutes

Alternately I could have phone in my bag on/in the bus/train/plane/shop/park - be sitting next to you by have the RSSI so low that app thinks we are not in contact.

Why would the RSSI be so low when you are that close to someone? Normally, it would be high in that situation.

Obviously, this is a use of Bluetooth that was never intended. So, it's definitely going to be far from perfect, but I don't see the problem in theory.

As regards self reporting when you have tested positive, from what I heard you will need to get a code from your GP to authenticate the information before you can log a test result. The system will be completely useless without that kind of protection.

Concerning power consumption, I don't think the issue is Bluetooth as such, because Bluetooth has a low power mode now that can be used. It's more to do with the background app having to wake up each time the phone comes into contact with another device. Each time that happens will cause a spike in power consumption.

kippy

plodder wrote: »

It's only going to register when you are near the other device for several minutes

Why would the RSSI be so low when you are that close to someone? Normally, it would be high in that situation.

Obviously, this is a use of Bluetooth that was never intended. So, it's definitely going to be far from perfect, but I don't see the problem in theory.

As regards self reporting when you have tested positive, from what I heard you will need to get a code from your GP to authenticate the information before you can log a test result. The system will be completely useless without that kind of protection.

Concerning power consumption, I don't think the issue is Bluetooth as such, because Bluetooth has a low power mode now that can be used. It's more to do with the background app having to wake up each time the phone comes into contact with another device. Each time that happens will cause a spike in power consumption.

Never mind power consumption and Bluetooth. These are surely not the show stoppers or main issues

kyote00

There has been decades of research on why it is crap but in summary
(https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/dtg/www/publications/public/acnt2/ubicomp2005-bluetooth.pdf)

Signal is attentuated as it travels through various mediums. The apps propose to use RSSI as a proxy for distance. Its hard to get accurate distance due to the characteristics of the 'bearer channel' - usually the air with some obstructions in the way.

Bluetooth and Bluetooth Low energy are different standards - BLE would be a better choice but not all mobiles have it

plodder wrote: »

Why would the RSSI be so low when you are that close to someone? Normally, it would be high in that situation.

robinph

The first few articles I saw about the potential apps a month ago talked about Bluetooth LE. I guess the LE was too many characters to waste to bother including in articles any more and nobody knows the difference anyway so why confuse people.

plodder

The link above doesn't work. It's well known that Bluetooth is "crap", but what it needs to do here is something very specific. I doubt that any previous research on it is particularly relevant. As I've said on the other thread, apps are no panacea but they could be a useful addition, if people use them.

Anyone using public transport should certainly get it, for their own sake as much as anyone else. Should it be mandatory for using public transport? There's an interesting question...

kippy

plodder wrote: »

The link above doesn't work. It's well known that Bluetooth is "crap", but what it needs to do here is something very specific. I doubt that any previous research on it is particularly relevant. As I've said on the other thread, apps are no panacea but they could be a useful addition, if people use them.

Anyone using public transport should certainly get it, for their own sake as much as anyone else. Should it be mandatory for using public transport? There's an interesting question...

How could this be enforced?

Diarmuid

All this discussion about bluetooth reliability is completely missing the big picture

There are two models to contact tracing, centralized and decentralized. Apple & Google have adopted the decntralised approach which is very similar to DP-3T. Dummies guide to DP-3T here https://ncase.me/contact-tracing/

The other major alternative is PEPP-PT. This is the approach that the UK, France and originally Germany took. However it seems lack of transparency and moving the a centralised approach with the massive privacy implicatations that that introduced caused many to split to DP-3T. Germany has now left the PEPP-PT and joined the decentralized approach

Here's a good insight https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/digital-brief-pepp-pt-the-inside-story/
The Swiss want the decentralized approach https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/edoeb/de/home/aktuell/aktuell_news.html#-2127623467

Two more good links
https://tech.newstatesman.com/security/european-coronavirus-contact-tracing-app-sparks-uproar-in-the-privacy-community
https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/17/europes-pepp-pt-covid-19-contacts-tracing-standard-push-could-be-squaring-up-for-a-fight-with-apple-and-google/

plodder

kippy wrote: »

How could this be enforced?

I was just musing about it. The more I think about it, the more I think it shouldn't be.

Diarmuid

If anyone thinks that the NHS (either UK or Ireland) knows more about developing privacy focused apps that will actually work, then you are seriously delusional. They can barely run a health system, the one primary task they are supposed to do.

plodder

Diarmuid wrote: »

All this discussion about bluetooth reliability is completely missing the big picture

There are two models to contact tracing, centralized and decentralized. Apple & Google have adopted the decntralised approach which is very similar to DP-3T. Dummies guide to DP-3T here https://ncase.me/contact-tracing/

The other major alternative is PEPP-PT. This is the approach that the UK, France and originally Germany took. However it seems lack of transparency and moving the a centralised approach with the massive privacy implicatations that that introduced caused many to split to DP-3T. Germany has now left the PEPP-PT and joined the decentralized approach

Here's a good insight https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/digital-brief-pepp-pt-the-inside-story/

I think there's good reasons why Apple/Google went with the decentralised approach and there's good reasons why governments want the centralised approach. The data will actually be useful to governments to get a picture of where outbreaks are occurring. They won't get that with Apple/Google.

In countries like the US, people are much more likely to adopt the decentralised system. But, there you have people roaming the streets with guns, demanding that the lockdown be lifted. Yet, in Australia they enthusiastically took to their government's centralised system.

Personally, I'll work with either system so long as the details of it are made public and I'm satisfied that it's as secure as possible.

Diarmuid

plodder wrote: »

I think there's good reasons why Apple/Google went with the decentralised approach and there's good reasons why governments want the centralised approach. The data will actually be useful to governments to get a picture of where outbreaks are occurring. They won't get that with Apple/Google.e.

Yeah, governments will collect as much data as they possibly can on users and store it in a centralised database. DP-3T implements the minimum, secure approach *to get the job done*. I know which approach I would prefer

robinph

kippy wrote: »

How could this be enforced?

If the world is still in this situation in a couple of years time then you make all busses/ trains/ underground contactless for payments and make the contact tracing app the only one that you can pay via.

Obviously a whole heap of other issues to deal with to make that something the population will put up with if we have not got any further in the treatment in that time. But it could be done if there was the will.

For now you just have to rely on the population being mostly in agreement with what their governments are doing and whilst that lasts they will mostly do what they are told.

p15574

robinph wrote: »

If the world is still in this situation in a couple of years time then you make all busses/ trains/ underground contactless for payments and make the contact tracing app the only one that you can pay via.

Obviously a whole heap of other issues to deal with to make that something the population will put up with if we have not got any further in the treatment in that time. But it could be done if there was the will.

For now you just have to rely on the population being mostly in agreement with what their governments are doing and whilst that lasts they will mostly do what they are told.

Kinda the way China is now. I don't think I'd want to live in a society like that.

Xertz

Apple in particular was extremely concerned about a data grab or function creep and will not allow access to Bluetooth scanning on a constant basis for apps.

The Google and Apple solution is going to be the only show in town as there’s no point in rolling out a government app that doesn’t work properly across both platforms.

You can get around that in Android to a degree, although some phones will switch off Bluetooth anyway as part of battery saving, but it’s far from ideal.

The U.K. has ignored Apple and Google on this so I would assume you’ll have a potential serious issue with technical ability for their app to work smoothly.

Also we’ve a border issue. The Irish app will be based around Google / Apple approach and the NI one is HM’s Gov Data Trawl.

I would suspect if we are using the Google / Apple approach we’ll have slick tracing very rapidly and it will work smoothly. Having the technical backup of the OS and hardware makers is enormously important. I would fully expect the NHS app to be rather glitchy.

So cross border stuff isn’t going to work.

That’s also going to be a massive issue across Europe if everyone isn’t using the same systems.