There have been a few articles on this since GM was caught. This is patently a terrible idea. First of all, it wasn't that much revenue to GM, something on the order of $3 Million dollars(!!). That is probably their paperclip budget for 2024. For Honda it was a few hundred thousand dollars. Absolutely nothing. Now they are facing lawsuits. I can't imagine your company's reputation is worth a few hundred K. Secondly, the data doesn't have ANY context. It simply looks at how often and you brake hard or accelerate hard, speed (as well as a few other metrics). So for example, you're getting on the highway, and you go full throttle? Well, gee, looks like you might be an "aggressive driver". Oh, someone pulled out in front of you and cut you off and you slammed on the brakes, gee, hmm, you might be an "aggressive driver". You went 10 over the speed limit, (you'll get run over for going that slow in some areas), looks like you're an inveterate speeder! People are losing their insurance based purely on this data. It is absolutely not ok, and none of us should accept it as such.

M

 

Not being facetious, just curious - can you please drop a link to where they denied it?

I would question it unless there's hard proof that's the only data they have.

Any modern navigation system not only has the real time track of where the user is, but also, for convenience (which is always at odds with security), the record of where the user's been, and possibly how often. Like I said elsewhere, insurance company is not the worst place this data can end up at - should any actor on this path (JLR, integrator, insurance) get breached, you're screwed.

But even it nobody gets breached, it's bad enough. One of the Big Tree credit companies was caught lowering their credit rating for people that were shopping at particular stores. You can easily imagine your insurance rating go sharply down should it be discovered that you're engaging in high risk activities, which offroading by definition is.

Which, by the way, can also be collected as a breadcrumb - say, if the insurance company gets a whiff of the fact that you were fueling at a gas station next to Moab, UT while living in Seattle, WA. It is not unimaginable that your credit card has your insurance company among their 692 partners (C)... but that's a deep rabbit hole, not here, not now.

 

I’m so glad that people are pounding their fists on the table over privacy rights. So one can assume that they are as adamant as stopping insurance company drones flying over your house to see if you need a new roof, or going after the “good ‘ol” state’s Attorneys General that are tracking a woman’s menstrual cycle and prying into their travel plans in the near future. I’m proud of your diligence in protecting ALL rights, not just your driving privacy. Very commendable. I salute you. We need more of you out there to stop this lunacy now. Privacy rights aren’t selective, but all-inclusive.

 

^^ Heavily second this. I DD a 2002 D2 which doesn't connect to the internet, and doesn't even have Bluetooth! But it sticks out like a sore thumb in a parking lot (super tall, lots of mods + stickers) easy to tell where I and where I'm traveling in it. I've had friends who live down the street from where I work say hi as they saw my car in the parking lot. I know this and accept the risks of being identified/tracked whatever. But for someone to do that they would have to tracked me physically or use cameras to track how often and what direction I travel in.

Now to add another privacy point when it comes to cars in relation to tracking regardless of make, model, year, or any manufacture. Some cities have license plate readers mounted on overpasses + bridges. Think of a red light camera, its the same thing but just scans your license plate on the highway, or on police vehicles. They are present in some parts of California (I don't know for sure if other states or cities do as well). I found this with a quick google search, so please don't take this at face value and do your own supplemental research before making political or factual statements. Even beyond that there are highway traffic cameras (useful for those traveling through snow or want to visualize how bad traffic is an area), and tons of cameras on nearly every building. Heck even ring cameras. I wouldn't be surprised if several ring cameras snapped a photo/recorded me going for a walk down the street.

I am NOT making any claims of government spying or not spying, but rather bringing up the point that data is collected. How this data is used and laws regarding it depends on your state and local governments!

https://ncric.ca.gov/wp-content/uplo...t-ALPR-FAQ.pdf .There are sub links within the pdf that will supply more information, but again do your own research on your local and city laws regarding this.

 

While I agree that their denial doesn't prove that they are not doing this, your quote from their privacy policy is not an admission of any kind - that line refers to using your information for targeted advertising.

One additional piece of data: when these reports first surfaced I put in requests to the data companies for any information that they had received from JLR. Unlike the results reported by customers of other car manufacturers, all I got was the basic information that I owned the vehicle. No driving data at all. Those of you who are worried about this issue should consider making the same requests and report back.

 

JLR won't claim not to sell your data, because they do sell personal data. The question is whether they sell identifiable driving data, which they claim not to, based on their InControl data privacy document.

LexisNexis and Verisk were the two companies at the center of these original complaints, as reported by the NYT back in March this year. I requested data from both of them. The links are at the end of the article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/t...insurance.html

 

Kazimir: “Side note, has anyone ever noticed the irony? Democrats want guns taken away because "think of the children!"... but yet they also want the "right" to have abortions at will?

Quick response, because after suffering 17 tornadoes in our area last night we have bigger fish to fry, and I don’t want to let politics intrude but I felt I needed to add some clarity to the endless misinformation out there. No one is looking to ‘take your guns away’, as is so erroneously misstated. I own guns and believe in the right to own them. However, common sense gun laws are just that. Common sense. That would go a long way in keeping the lives of children protected too. I like guns, but I like children, also. They deserve more. Time to fuel the generator and check on my neighbors. We value our lives and those around us.

 

🥱 Sorry, but your prattle is boring me. Too much misinformation. Must be an X sycophant, and a Musk admirer. And FYI, I currently own a Kimber Micro 9 and an Sig Sauer P365 9mm, since you are the doubting type.

 

@ArmyRover - Not throwing shade on anyone, but can we close the thread? I think we've exhausted all of the productive dialog and entered the personal attacks. No opinions on any side, this just seems to be the latest on a circular thread.