Posts by Nick.

You're missing the point. The accuracy of the GPS function provided is secondary...

The PoS mouthpiece for this PoS product claimed that the GPS accuracy of the product was +/-500m and that that was well-known to those buying it, so they were not buying it for accurately locating their kids, and hence the bad guys could not either. However, the product's webpage at the company's official site https://www.enoxgroup.de/our-products/smartwatches/safe-kid-one/ and the "product sheet" for the watch, linked from that page both say "Through downloading of an APP in your Smartphone (QR Code included in the User Manual), you can locate and follow your Kid – almost to the Meter – on a GPS Map in your Smartphone". So, he is lying about the claimed accuracy of the GPS and what parents/purchasers presumably thought about their ability to "pinpoint" their kids' locations from using the watch and app. These claims speak to the veracity and credibility of the company, which is obviously deeply questionable. It is, at a minimum, obvious that Enox is a compamy that makes/markets "high tech" products (actually, probably mostly re-badges and markets other people's products, right?) without much clue about broader issues of such 'high tech" than how to maximize the profit it makes...

Re: GDPR users were less exposed

Why do you feel the right to know certain information outweighs the other party's right to privacy?

Ohhhh, for no particular reason other than that being able to directly contact the "owner" or "admin" of any machine on the network is the infrastructure-level security model of the networking protocol set that the internet is built on...

If you don't want to run an internet-connected host because you don't want to be readily identifiable and contactable, then this internet is the wrong internet for you. ICANN et al. screwed this all up many years ago when they handed over management of ccTLDs to other jurisdictions without requiring those jurisdictions adhere to such central internet "security protocols" in the first place. If, say, Germany had not liked that because it conflicted with German privacy laws, then .de should not have been able to be put under the control of a German entity, at least until Germany exempted "(certain parts of) participating in the internet" from (certain parts of) Germany's privacy laws, etc, etc.

Re: Suicide

To work, these sextortion scam messages certainly depend on potential victims being aware of actual sextortion incidents, or at least believing in the possibility. One would hope no-one was gullible enough to be moved to suicide by these scammy threats, but there are certainly quite a few apparently genuine "is this real?" type questions about these scam messages on various online fora, so these scam messages at least work well enough to concern some of their recipients.