Fitbit2

Nowadays, we always have discussions and conversations about turning of the location services on our phones, surveillance cameras and trackers on websites. But do we ever think about the trackers that aren’t that obvious and widely discussed? My research will dig into the question whether the non-human forms of sociality create implications for the privacy of Fitbit users. To answer this question, I looked into the non-human actors of a Fitbit, the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policies. This infographic shows the results from this research. Concluded is that the main privacy implication that is created by the non-human actors is the fact that users aren’t aware of the fact that the Bluetooth connection that transfers the data from their Fitbit to their app is not encrypted and thus lacks security. % of communication about privacy issues in the policies 0% This infographic is based on the fitbit dashboard. A state look a in wh t w ic the hat m n or ca act given an ven’t ha o so d erson or n p r e th doing wh on-h o no ur ’reit permissieon yo um h yo lic u n to p x e De-identifiable information Data that can’t be linked to the user where the information is from. Indentifiable information cti on betwe a r e t in en e no th y nb h d e ors act an um Socia lity cre at Keypoints policies Data Fitbit collects Privacy Non-human sociality Data that can be linked back to the user where the information is from. Bluetooth 1 2 Terms of Use - Everything uploaded is theirs - Terms of Use do not apply to third party apps and content 100% 100% Third parties Data collecting Privacy Policy Uploaded data Data that got uploaded into the app by users. 3 - Personal information collected - De-identifiable information collected - All information stored on servers - Information not shared, unless it’s necessary 100% Data saving