England & Wales Tracing App to be released Sept 24th

[Bantamzen]

That's a rather sensible model if true.

Not sure how it will work in practice for businesses though. If customers are doing the QR thing, then the business itself doesn't need to keep a record of the customer visit. But it will if they're not. Sounds a bit complex to manage.

I think its the other way around, businesses can choose to display the QR code but they will still have to keep a T&T record. I think the idea of the check-in is that someone might get a notification a little bit quicker via that rather than relying on the business or T&T team to message / phone around.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's a rather sensible model if true.

Not sure how it will work in practice for businesses though. If customers are doing the QR thing, then the business itself doesn't need to keep a record of the customer visit. But it will if they're not. Sounds a bit complex to manage.

Fortunately that's Test and Trace's job, not theirs. They just need to have collected the data, and T&T will tell them what they want.

I think its the other way around, businesses can choose to display the QR code but they will still have to keep a T&T record. I think the idea of the check-in is that someone might get a notification a little bit quicker via that rather than relying on the business or T&T team to message / phone around.

If that's the case it's pointless. I didn't think it was the case, though, i.e. you could use either.

 

[AM9]

Fortunately that's Test and Trace's job, not theirs. They just need to have collected the data, and T&T will tell them what they want.



If that's the case it's pointless. I didn't think it was the case, though, i.e. you could use either.

Surely the whole system is independent of the establishment once they have displayed their particular QR code. When a case is confirmed (via a test) that phone would reveal where it had communicated a) with QR codes (i.e. locations) and b) other phones as regards to sustained proximity via bluetooth. Then it would be for the system to alert those phones with a message for their owners to get tested.

 

[Bantamzen]

If that's the case it's pointless. I didn't think it was the case, though, i.e. you could use either.

Not necessarily, those people using the app will get effectively an earlier warning, but with not everyone using or possibly deleting it businesses will still have to maintain records.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not necessarily, those people using the app will get effectively an earlier warning, but with not everyone using or possibly deleting it businesses will still have to maintain records.

I shan't use it then, I'm not doing it twice. The benefit to me was a quick scan equating to check in rather than faffing out completing a form.

 

[Bantamzen]

I shan't use it then, I'm not doing it twice. The benefit to me was a quick scan equating to check in rather than faffing out completing a form.

I must admit it's a missed trick, the site to build the QR code should also have allowed a registration link to be included.

 

[Romsey]

I don't deny that. However, I don't believe our government are going to lift restrictions if there is the prospect of a huge number of deaths (we can debate whether that is right another time but it's true).

The problem is that I don't think ignoring lockdown advice is going to persuade this government that they've done anything wrong; instead it persuades them to make the advice law and start fining people for it, as we've seen already.

Honestly my ideal outcome would be a government which isn't a total farce, and a proper contact tracing system that isn't an absolute farce. But that probably won't happen.

They can, do, and should check that the confirmation screen shows on your phone before letting you in.

If you don't have a smart phone??
You're refused entry?
or they have to keep paper records?
or shrug and ignore like many other government led idea over the last few months ......

 

[py_megapixel]

or they have to keep paper records?

This is what they've been doing since Track + Trace started, for those without smartphones.
Alternatively, it wouldn't be difficult for them to issue staff with a tablet, so that they can fill out the form on behalf of anyone without a smartphone.

 

[greyman42]

This is what they've been doing since Track + Trace started, for those without smartphones.
Alternatively, it wouldn't be difficult for them to issue staff with a tablet, so that they can fill out the form on behalf of anyone without a smartphone.

They were doing that in Nicholsons pubs in London yesterday.

 

[MikeWM]

The relevant regulation has now been made, as usual just hours before it comes into effect. It applies to effectively all hospitality and leisure businesses. (Oddly, it doesn't seem to cover cinemas, but I expect that to be a drafting error).

It requires taking name and phone number (or email address if no phone number, or postal address if no email address).

It requires such businesses to take all 'reasonable steps' to refuse entry if a person refuses to do so (!)

It also *requires* such businesses to display a QR code that can be scanned by the new app, though not until the 24th.

It appears to say that if you scan the QR code, you don't need to then provide any further information.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The Regulation is typically complex!

It has a number of requirements, some of which apply to all the premises listed in the Schedule (including Part 2, which includes all sorts of low-risk places such as castles!), whereas others apply only to places providing food or drink for consumption on the premises (Part 1).

Both Part 1 and 2 premises must display a T&T QR code. This is the first time that there has been an (explicit, statutory) requirement to display any particular poster during this pandemic in England. There is, worryingly, no alternative to complying with this requirement by providing contact tracing forms.

Both Part 1 and 2 premises must request visitors to scan the QR code or else complete a T&T form upon entering. In the case of groups, the QR code must be scanned, or details given, separately for each non-exempt member of the group (people under 16 or those with a disability preventing them from complying are exempt). Permissible groups of more than 6, e.g. large households, are split up into "sub-groups" for this purpose.

However, only Part 1 premises (i.e. pubs, restaurants etc.) have an active obligation to refuse entry to visitors that don't scan the QR code or complete a T&T form. So, in other words, Part 2 premises can get away with having a sign, notice etc. asking visitors to do T&T, whereas pubs must force you.

The Regulations effectively put the whole hospitality contact tracing system on a firm legal basis, which is certainly better than the current unregulated system. They are good inasmuch as they require the deletion of contact tracing details after 21 days, although they then spoil this by allowing a get-out in case there's another valid reason for keeping the details. You can be sure that plenty of less savoury places will be using confusing opt in/out marketing tickboxes...

However forcing even the smallest of low-risk premises such as art fairs and museums to put up the QR code posters is an extremely onerous requirement in my view - and one that could potentially be amenable to judicial review. No doubt any such JR would happen far too late for it to have any meaningful effect.

 

[Mintona]

Lol no. I don’t trust this lot with anything, I won’t be downloading their app.

 

[Bletchleyite]

However forcing even the smallest of low-risk premises such as art fairs and museums to put up the QR code posters is an extremely onerous requirement in my view

In what way is that onerous? It's about the least onerous restriction possible, both for the business and the visitor. I welcome this, as it means I can use the app rather than having to faff about filling forms in.

For maximum effect, every indoor business open to the public should display them without exception.

Edit: it appears the wording regarding QR codes is a bit off - it only requires you to scan the code, not to do it using any particular app or to do something as a result of the scan. Incompetent much?

 

[py_megapixel]

I have changed my vote to "no, privacy". For those of you who read my earlier posts this will seem like a bit of a U-turn so I will explain why.

In essence, I had assumed wrongly that the app would be collecting much less data. My assumption was that it would only be for Bluetooth tracking, and T+T details would stay in the hands of the local businesses. For some reason it had not clicked with me that this app would do that as well.

It really wouldn't surprise me if it requires GPS data as well.

This creates something which I have moral objection to - a list of every location I have visited, associated with my name and contact details, in the hands of a single organisation.

If this single organisation had managed to prove themselves to be anything other than a bunch of incompetent morons with no idea what they're talking about and who are entirely unfit to govern, then I might have been willing to use the app given that these are exceptional circumstances. But given that they have not, I will not, if you see what I mean.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This creates something which I have moral objection to - a list of every location I have visited, associated with my name and contact details, in the hands of a single organisation.

Is your phone an Android phone? If so, did you know Google already has that?

The tracking can be switched off - I'd suggest you do some Googling (or perhaps on a different search engine )

 

[py_megapixel]

Is your phone an Android phone? If so, did you know Google already has that?

The tracking can be switched off - I'd suggest you do some Googling (or perhaps on a different search engine )

I have already done that...

 

[MikeWM]

However, only Part 1 premises (i.e. pubs, restaurants etc.) have an active obligation to refuse entry to visitors that don't scan the QR code or complete a T&T form. So, in other words, Part 2 premises can get away with having a sign, notice etc. asking visitors to do T&T, whereas pubs must force you.

Yes, I missed that in my read-through last night. I'm not sure why you wouldn't specify in regulation 16 when it applies and doesn't, rather than having that mentioned via regulation 5, unless you were trying to confuse matters (or aren't great at drafting - given the serious mistakes in the NE lockdown regulations also published yesterday, perhaps the latter).

 

[Camden]

I have changed my vote to "no, privacy". For those of you who read my earlier posts this will seem like a bit of a U-turn so I will explain why.

In essence, I had assumed wrongly that the app would be collecting much less data. My assumption was that it would only be for Bluetooth tracking, and T+T details would stay in the hands of the local businesses. For some reason it had not clicked with me that this app would do that as well.

It really wouldn't surprise me if it requires GPS data as well.

This creates something which I have moral objection to - a list of every location I have visited, associated with my name and contact details, in the hands of a single organisation.

If this single organisation had managed to prove themselves to be anything other than a bunch of incompetent morons with no idea what they're talking about and who are entirely unfit to govern, then I might have been willing to use the app given that these are exceptional circumstances. But given that they have not, I will not, if you see what I mean.

You could still use the app, but not use it to scan QR codes. You would then have to fill in your contact details at wherever it was you were (which you will have to do anyway, even if you don't have the app).

I'll wait to see the app for myself and explore the permissions it uses. I'm hopeful that the government have gone back to Apple and Google's initial suggestion of isolated key exchanges rather than centralised data collection.

That being the case, it will be a rare opportunity for us all to use our phone addictions for our actual benefit!

 

[MikeWM]

We need to have the source code published. Does anyone know if they're planning to do that?

 

[nlogax]

We need to have the source code published. Does anyone know if they're planning to do that?

Try the NHS's GitHub repository.

 

[MikeWM]

Try the NHS's GitHub repository.

Ok, good. People who do this sort of thing will no doubt give us a security/privacy analysis in due course. (I'm far too lazy to try!)

 

[py_megapixel]

Ok, good. People who do this sort of thing will no doubt give us a security/privacy analysis in due course. (I'm far too lazy to try!)

Thank god it's open source!

 

[LancasterRed]

This thread has served a different purpose to the intentions of the title and that is to show up how misaligned some of this forum can be.

I'll be downloading the app immediately on launch, but will keep a keen eye for privacy concerns. Ultimately we are in a modern technological era and some personal details must be disclosed in order to stop the spread of the virus through track and trace. As long as it remains the case I will continue to do my bit for my family, community and country and keep the app up to date so that I self-isolate if required and protect people.

 

[takno]

This thread has served a different purpose to the intentions of the title and that is to show up how misaligned some of this forum can be.

I'll be downloading the app immediately on launch, but will keep a keen eye for privacy concerns. Ultimately we are in a modern technological era and some personal details must be disclosed in order to stop the spread of the virus through track and trace. As long as it remains the case I will continue to do my bit for my family, community and country and keep the app up to date so that I self-isolate if required and protect people.

The thread title is "England & Wales Tracing App to be released Sept 24th", and the question is "Will you be installing it?". I don't think that contains any intentions at all. There's also a difference between being unaligned and misaligned.

You're doing what you feel to be the right thing, so go you. Other people have different but sensible, well reasoned ideas about what the right is, and will be acting accordingly. I think that's great. Good for everyone.

 

[sharpinf]

Haven't seen it posted before but just seen my first example of the check in QR code.

Was positioned in a corner by the gents loos so not sure how many will notice it out of the total amount of visitors! No one paying it any attention as let

 

[takno]

Haven't seen it posted before but just seen my first example of the check in QR code.

<IMAGE TRIMMED>

Was positioned in a corner by the gents loos so not sure how many will notice it out of the total amount of visitors! No one paying it any attention as let

That's a surprisingly lengthy and obscure QR code - took a fair time for my phone to read it. A postcode, some kind of venue id, maybe a sub id for the part of the venue you're in and an issue date would have covered all bases fairly neatly I'd have thought. I'm more concerned about the scan-ability implications than the privacy ones, but keeping this kind of thing simple and vaguely human-readable is usually a good idea for both reasons.

 

[MikeWM]

Thank god it's open source!

Yes, they're doing that part right at least.

I've found one person on Twitter who claims to have looked at the source code and says it works by storing the locations you're scanned on your phone and from time to time the phone will download a list of 'infected' locations and inform you appropriately. If so, that's probably about as good as could be expected from a privacy point of view - nothing centralised. (though this is one person on Twitter - would be good to see a few more opinions first).

 

[Bantamzen]

Haven't seen it posted before but just seen my first example of the check in QR code.

Was positioned in a corner by the gents loos so not sure how many will notice it out of the total amount of visitors! No one paying it any attention as letView attachment 83653

Hold on, we have to check in every time we pay a call...

Yes, they're doing that part right at least.

I've found one person on Twitter who claims to have looked at the source code and says it works by storing the locations you're scanned on your phone and from time to time the phone will download a list of 'infected' locations and inform you appropriately. If so, that's probably about as good as could be expected from a privacy point of view - nothing centralised. (though this is one person on Twitter - would be good to see a few more opinions first).

This pretty much sounds how the Google/Apple API was designed to be used, so I'd say they are probably close to the mark.

 

[big_rig]

Sky news reporting that 14 days self-isolation either from a positive test or contact by test & trace will be made law on the 28th, with fines starting at £1,000 and rising to £10,000 for non-compliance. May certainly affects whether one would want to download the app and scan in at the gents! A carrot as well as stick as a £500 bonus for low paid people for entering isolation.

Coronavirus: Breaking self-isolation to be made illegal with fines of up to £10,000

A lump sum is being promised to some workers on low incomes, as firms forcing staff to come in are threatened with a £10,000 fine.

news.sky.com

People who may have coronavirus will be required to self-isolate by law - with those who refuse facing fines of up to £10,000 in England.

Ministers are toughening up their stance by making the current guidance a legal requirement in a bid to try and prevent a second spike of COVID-19 ballooning across the UK and a potential second national lockdown.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson is changing the law from Monday 28 September to force anyone who gets a positive test or is contacted by the Test and Trace system and told they may have the virus to isolate.

At the same time, a £500 lump sum is being offered to those who need to isolate and will lose money as a result of not working, are on benefits and cannot do their job from home.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Sky news reporting that 14 days self-isolation either from a positive test or contact by test & trace will be made law on the 28th, with fines starting at £1,000 and rising to £10,000 for non-compliance. May certainly affects whether one would want to download the app and scan in at the gents! A carrot as well as stick as a £500 bonus for low paid people for entering isolation.

I reckon this'll just make more people try to circumvent the system - i.e. by providing false details, or not picking up the phone to T&T.

Usual 10pm announcement via Sky News as per usual though. I wonder what junior minister will be dragged out of bed to do the Sunday morning news rounds tomorrow and face endless questions regarding it?