UK finds itself almost alone with centralized virus contact-tracing app that probably won't work well, asks for your location, may be illegal

Britain is sleepwalking into another coronavirus blunder by failing to listen to global consensus and expert analysis with the release of the NHS COVID-19 contact-tracking app. On Monday, the UK government explained in depth and in clearly written language how its iOS and Android smartphone application – undergoing trials in …

[fajensen]

Re: Hanlon's razor

I doubt the Swedish strategy would have worked in the UK.

Oh, it's working the same way in Sweden, being a materially similar 'heard-immunity'-strategy (also known as Eugenics), the difference is that it is more coherently branded in Sweden.

In fact Sweden is a bit ahead of the UK with a faster growth rate:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-deaths-days-since-per-million?country=DNK+NOR+GBR+SWE

[Freddie]

Re: Hanlon's razor

The issue being that their approach (and the approach of herd immunity in general) will have value if we still have to social distance/isolate up until the point where a vaccine is ready. Time will tell; we certainly can't call which approach was better at this stage (and to claim one approach was "right" or "wrong", as they did in the article, shows a laughable level of ignorance).

[Jason Bloomberg]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Like we did when we asked people to just stay home and not gather, unless they had to, and just be sensible about it ? If it worked, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

It has worked; the evidence is there to demonstrate that. The problems were mostly elsewhere -

The government were initially against containment and eradication and went for a 'ride it out' approach. They allowed it to gain a foothold and spread and that's why we are in the situation we are in.

They were slow to introduce lockdown and pursued their "many loved ones will die", oh well, how sad, never mind, herd immunity plan until the outcry and outrage from scientists and public became too much to bear.

Lack of PPE and testing for community healthcare workers allowed undetected spread and has made some care homes death traps for their residents, the most vulnerable.

[hoola]

Re: Hanlon's razor

The issue about being slow to implement lockdown is debatable. There has been a lot talked about lockdown-fatigue.

Until last weekend roads have been pretty quite however there has been a dramatic, step change in traffic. On Monday there were actually queues of cars at traffic lights and significant non-commercial traffic on the M1. Given that nothing is supposed to have changed then that is an awful lot of people who are now travelling, either for leisure (unlikely at 7:00am) or are now returning to work.

This weekend there were significant numbers of cars with 2 people in driving about Saturday and Sunday. There may be genuine reasons but again, if this is for shopping then only one person should be out. The entire lockdown is pretty much a self-policing event requiring cooperation and honesty from the population. If the lockdown was started earlier it is very difficult to know if it would have ended earlier. At the moment an unknown percentage of the population has had COVID19. There is insufficient evidence that having been infected gives immunity (this is one of the key problems to developing Coronavirus vaccines) so an antibody test is not necessarily helpful other than providing statistics and testing for infection only tells you who has it at that moment in time. The final bit helps with identify and trace but again, you have to have a huge testing programme of the entire population, regardless of whether the believe they have been infected for it to work. All the apps are doing is matching positive tests against contacts. This will only achieve real progress if the number of tests (and retests) goes up.

In terms of centralised of decentralised the majority of the public don't care, those of us that do are in the minority and will just been seen as critics of something that is trying to do good.

I don't trust, Google, Apple or the Government with the information and the decentralised approach still needs an update from a central database. Both have to get their raw information from somewhere and the output of the contacts then has to be acted upon.

The big question for either approach is what happens if the take-up is not high enough to be effective.

No one has addressed this and as other articles/comments have eluded to, it is not beyond possibility that an App becomes compulsory. At that point we are into a whole new ball game.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Hanlon's razor

"Given that nothing is supposed to have changed then that is an awful lot of people who are now travelling, either for leisure (unlikely at 7:00am) or are now returning to work."

A binary division into essential and non-essential might be part of this. Somewhere in the middle is deferrable; what could be put off or put up with a few weeks ago might not be now.

Then there's the possibility that over the last few weeks managements have worked out means of allowing some work that requires physical presence of workers to go ahead to some extent.

[Mike Pellatt]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Nothing wrong with 2 people in the car going shopping.

We shop for 3 other households who are shielding, plus 1 or 2 others with mobility issues. Plus, of course, ourselves.

Try shopping for up to 6 households on your own.

[steveking1000]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Another reason for more traffic. Ministers have been pushing Construction to continue regardless throughout this period (hence the photos of all the construction workers trying to get on the tube).

Many companies shut their sites for a few weeks, but with a combination of financial pressures and the contractual risk of being sued by clients (of course you could have continued to work, the government said so!) they are now opening up more and more sites.

Depending on what related trades you include, construction is 5 to 10 percent of the economy, so a lot of commuters and traffic.

Many of these are low wage people as well, so unlikely to have enough savings to be able to be picky about offers to go back to work.

[Steve 114]

Re: Hanlon's razor

And what percent of the phones in use have Android updateable-enough to be used at all? None in this elderly house, and when I go out I take instead the unsmart bananaphone that 'just works' to answer calls rather than footling around with a smartphone screen.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Hanlon's razor

"Like we* did when we* asked people to just stay home and not gather, unless they had to, and just be sensible about it ?"

That "unless they had to" opens up a whole load of opportunities for infection. There's also the small matter of just how long "we" took to getting round to this.

*Who's this "we"? Are you HMG's lurker?

[Arthur the cat]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Or, in the case of the British Government (and governments the world over): never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by arrogance and paternalism.

Whereas I'd agree about the British Government (having worked for the Civil Service at one point, and having friends who still do, including the Cabinet Office), to apply that to all governments is to fall into the Wykehamist Fallacy.

[Adair]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Well, I wouldn't apply it to ALL governments, but it is certainly a common feature - the more so where ever entrenched privilege through aggregation of power and money are a prominent feature of 'government'.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Hanlon's razor

to apply that to all governments is to fall into the Wykehamist Fallacy adopt a reasonable default position.

FTFY

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hanlon's razor

I’d love to see your evidence for that claim about responsible adults. My experience of the last half-century is that the more discretion you give the population as a whole, the faster it speeds towards greedy destruction of its own best interests. I have a lot of evidence to back that up, ranging from destruction of our own environment to the massive prevalence of fat, stupid bastards almost everywhere, to use a technical public health descriptor. YMMV, of course.

[gnasher729]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Much more likely is that there's not much money to be made from Apple/Google's code. As an iOS developer, you can download a working app right now and just have to add a few bits say to make it NHS specific.

[Teiwaz]

Re: Hanlon's razor

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

The world is full of complexity, myriad different goals and abilities, factions, wings, groups all vying to get their agendas fulfilled.

Why rule out one for the other.

It's probably both Malice <u>and</u> Stupidity.....

.....arrogance, blinkered vision, greed....etc.

[ClockworkOwl]

Re: Hanlon's razor

Hubristic ignorance, they fail to understand what it is that they fail to understand, and when they get one tiny corner of the puzzle right, they stand around patting each other on the back...

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Hanlon's razor

But how many times do you have to encounter this sort of behaviour in HMG before you ask yourself if they're really that stupid?

[Phil Endecott]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

> It could be centrally configured to neglect to alert those who the

> Government considered to be Troublemakers.

Or the opposite - do alert them and keep them at home unnecessarily.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

Do you think that "troublemakers" with the virus can't pass it on to "non-troublemakers"?

[LittleTyke]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

This morning Matt Hancock on Sky News was scathing about critical articles like this one on the NHS app, although he did not specifically cite The Register by name. He basically refuted the charges and said, in terms, that such critical articles were wrong and authors/publishers should first apprise themselves of the facts before putting pen to paper. I note that the article has in fact been "updated" I.E. corrected today on a couple of points. So now I don't know _who_ to believe. I'd like to believe the (updated) article, but I have to say that Hancock was pretty succinct in his denunciation of criticism against the app.

[Jesthar]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

You have to look beyond the weasel words. Of course he's going to be defending the app - it's kind of his job. But it's easy to keep repeating how everyone is wrong about it whilst not actually offering any specific details or answers to concerns, whilst deflecting from the real privacy concerns with constant reference to the app not 'tracking' anyone, when the real concerns come from the uniquely-to-your-app coded data which would be sent to the central server if you pushed the button - data you then lose all control over and can be used however the recipents see fit for - well, forever.

And, technically speaking, he's not wrong when he says the app doesn't track people - the app itself (in it's current incarnation, anyway - who knows how it might evolve) isn't a tracker in the way most people would use that term (like the running/cycling route tracker apps). It's the central server that does that part, isn't it...

Anyway, I'll trust El Reg over a government minister any day when it comes to technical analysis and honesty ;)

[AlbertH]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

Matt Hancock really understands Operating Systems and software for phones.....NOT!

[OhDearyMe]

Re: Of course, being centrally controlled

Being centrally controlled it could be adapted to ignore bad actors - like botnets spamming it with false notifications.

I am fascinated to see how Germany manages to build its app and central server in a way that protects it from that sort of abuse, the anonymity seems so baked in that it lacks the information to protect itself. Downloading all the keys for everyone who has tested positive is one thing, downloading a bulk of fake keys from a malicious actor could easily render the thing unworkable.

Any suggestions on how you have an open source app with no identification that cannot be spoofed?

[Paul Crawford]

It is down to stupidity or Machiavellian plans?

Sadly it could be both :(

[Anonymous Coward]

this snippet from yesterday's news may suggest it's not stupidity

"In a separate email, sent from NHS England on Saturday, trusts have been instructed to carry out a daily stock check from the beginning of this week. They must report down to the nearest 100 their stores of 13 types of protective equipment, including gloves, aprons, masks, gowns and eye protection. The information is being gathered by Palantir, a data processing company co-founded by the Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel.

The information will be used to distribute equipment to those trusts most in need, and in some cases move stock from one hospital to another."

[Blofeld's Cat]

Hmm ...

_{require_once('sarcasm'); // Just in case}

I can't imagine that anyone in authority would misuse this data. I mean knowing where people were and who they met has no possible other use to anyone.

You might as well suggest that the Parks Department would use anti-terrorist legislation to check on dog-walkers.

I also wonder what will happen when the first person who uses the app gets Covid-19 from a contact, without the app alerting them ?

My guess is "lawyers".

[Mr Humbug]

> I also wonder what will happen when the first person who uses the app gets Covid-19 from a contact, without the app alerting them ?

Nothing. It's not NHSX's fault if the contact who gave you the virus didn't use the app, didn't activate the app properly or used the app but didn't report their symptoms. The app is perfect, it's the users (or lack of them) that are the problem.

[Inkey]

Whats the point then!

And there is the problem with it...

What good is it if people don't want to use it?

I wouldn't if it slurps as much as it can for someone else's reasons... Thanks but the decentralised version is a better idea and probably works better than reported.... You could use some thing like Matrix or riotx... And have the room server's anonymise the privacy stuff....

Can we all get over having to have an app for everything ffs

Also tldr: because on balance of previous experience it won't go away and will be used/hacked by and for neferios types

[ManMountain1]

Re: Whats the point then!

Interesting how bias creeps in. The journo says the centralised one probably won't work as well as expected, you say the de-centralised one will probably work better than reported.

[Warm Braw]

Re: Hmm ...

My guess is "lawyers"

Part of the emergency coronavirus legislation is designed to:

provide indemnity for clinical negligence liabilities arising from NHS activities carried out for the purposes of dealing with, or because of, the coronavirus outbreak, where there is no existing indemnity arrangement in place

Could be expensive.

[jake]

And what about the people ...

... who don't have a cell phone addiction, and so don't really see a need to carry one everywhere? And what about those of us who have phones that don't run "apps"? I don't think even the current British nanny state has made carrying a so-called "smart" phone mandatory ... or did I miss that bit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: And what about the people ...

Or the people that have a mobile phone that is just a phone.

A good example would be my father who sticks with his Nokia 6310 for it's 2 week battery life and ability to use an external aerial.

The external aerial bit is important as he spends a lot of time living on canal boats (and mobiles don't work too well in steel boxes).

Being boat based also brings up another problem with the proposed app, He has no postcode or address (when I ask him where he is I usually get the name of the canal he is on and the bridge / lock numbers that he is between)

[jake]

Re: And what about the people ...

My Dad doesn't own a cell phone at all. Never has. Never will. Mom has one, on a bare-bones plan, for "emergencys". It has only been powered up a couple times in the eight or so years she's had it. Nobody knows it's number, in her eyes it's dial-out only. There are zero apps installed on it. In fact, there is at least one voice mail message on it, but she doesn't know how to retrieve it. Doesn't care, either. "If it's important, they have the house number" is their general attitude.

This is very common in the over-70 set here in Northern California. Dunno about blighty.

[LucreLout]

Re: And what about the people ...

This is very common in the over-70 set here in Northern California. Dunno about blighty.

My folks both have smartphones - my generation scattered around the globe, which means the grandkids are so scattered. While I live in the UK, I live at the 'wrong' end of it for tea with Grandma & Grandad. Smartphones just make it easier to stay in touch with video calling wherever we may be.

The older generations being technology phobic or illiterate is a fun meme for millennial's, but that's all its ever really been here in the UK.

[the hatter]

Re: And what about the people ...

Similar experience. I suspect in some small part, the availability of cheap PAYG and cheap low-ned handsets and the difficulty in getting a non-smartphone unless you're really trying to avoid one. Once you've bought your parents/grandparents one, they become, if not hooked, then at least understanding of the conveniences. The younger generations don't want to print out and post photos of themselves/offspring/pets, and maintaining/not-breaking their smartphone is rather easier than keeping an occasionally-used laptop happy, for both parties, so whether it's email, faceb**k, or whatever.

Plus unlike US telephony, in the UK calling from landline to a non-local mobile can cost some, whereas mobile to mobile is almost always 'free', and even if the older folks answer their landlines, noone else does.

[Adelio]

Re: And what about the people ...

Although I do have a modern smartphone I do not, unlike some people, carry it with me everywhere.

I usually carry it to work (unless I forget) but then it gets left on my desk until I go home.

At home it usually stays in one place and rarly goes with me if i leave the house.

Being an old fart (61) I find it amazing how much time some people spend on their phones.

I probably do about 10 text a month and about 50 minutes of calls.

I have never used twatter and I have almost stopped using facefart a couple of years ago. (probably look at it once a month). after all most of it is Dross.

Because of lockdown internet is a bit bigger as we are Whatsapping my two sons. but normally I probably only use a couple of med a month!

[Teiwaz]

Re: And what about the people ...

The older generations being technology phobic or illiterate is a fun meme for millennial's, but that's all its ever really been here in the UK.

My gran refused to be bothered with mobile phones despite being bought several big button ones, but she died in 2010 aged 98, couldn't get her interested in anything invented after colour Tv.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: And what about the people ...

The older generations being technology phobic or illiterate

Why is it than when someone says "I don't care about xxx" the response is always to accuse them of being scared of it, or too dumb to use it?

Some people just have more important things to do in their lives.

[eionmac]

Re: And what about the people ...

Likewise in East of Pond. My street has 24 houses. only two have smartphones. 'Some' of rest have text/phone only old 2G phones. (I use a 2G phone. no internet capability, no apps)

[matthewdjb]

Re: And what about the people ...

I think we must have the same dad.

[werdsmith]

Re: And what about the people ...

I find that the older folks have generally embraced smartphones and they are quite popular in the over 70s. My father in law has an amazing high tech hearing aid that he controls from a smartphone app.

[Arthur the cat]

Re: And what about the people ...

I find that the older folks have generally embraced smartphones and they are quite popular in the over 70s

If they have a full set of marbles. I've got a couple of elderly family members with Alzheimer's, there's no way they could use a smartphone, even though one of them can use a old Nokia "feature phone". They don't even remember that they shouldn't go out. It's making life (even more of a) hell for their carers.

[First Light]

Re: And what about the people ...

I hate to say it but I do believe some elderly with moderate or severe Alzheimer's/dementia need microchips. I once had to call Berkeley police because some well-dressed older man got off the last bus at the last stop and sat there as if waiting for the next one. I knew he hadn't a clue what was happening.

[jake]

Re: And what about the people ...

Things like that have been happening since people figured out how to protect the elderly long enough for them to get into that state. Somehow we've managed to muddle through without chipping anyone.

Personally, I think it's a bad idea Slippery slope and all that.

[Mike Pellatt]

Re: And what about the people ...

There is GPS-enabled footwear for that. Much less, errrr, intrusive.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: And what about the people ...

"He has no postcode"

He could borrow one in SW1.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: And what about the people ...

My postcode for entry on websites and apps is either: W1A 1AA or SW1A 2AA

[Admiral Grace Hopper]

Re: And what about the people ...

I tend to use B12 2JP. Tiswas FTW.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: And what about the people ...

I think it’s safe to say most of the working population have a smartphone - and as such this can be considered the arrival of the long talked and balked at National ID card scheme via other means.

Of course NHS procurement is once again showing its expertise in getting an app out that both doesn’t work, is likely illegal, and likely earning crapita (or similar) a fat wad of cash.

For those that don’t comply, our already very thinly staffed police force will have one more job to do.

People keep voting for more of the same though, for some reason. Socialism is the enemy, says the state forced to adopt widespread socialist measures to stop society collapsing the way it appears to be in the US...

[Shades]

Re: And what about the people ...

"likely earning crapita (or similar) a fat wad of cash."

For once its not Crapita, but a company called Faculty.

Faculty, formerly ASI Data Science and Advanced Skills Initiative Ltd, was hired to work with Cummings on the Vote Leave campaign and has since, quelle surprise, been awarded at least 7 government contracts in the last 18 months. Want to guess what political party one of its shareholders is associated with?

Further still, Ben Warner, former principle of Faculty and brother of the founder, was hired by Cummings to work at Downing Street, after running the Conservatives private election model and (are you sitting down?) worked closely with Cummings on the Vote Leave campaign.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess the work done for Vote Leave and the Conservatives was pro bono.