Replies: 6 comments 38 replies
-
|
Thanks for posting this here. I had a short discussion with the team, and we're unsure if client IPs are used. If this is the case, they could be considered PII - if not anonymized correctly (e.g. last octet anonymized). --> if user IPs are actually collected, we'll need to update https://jamulus.io/wiki/Privacy-Statement#general-information and potentially update Jamulus. It's a bit odd that users without a set city (checked via Jamulus Explorer) show up with a set city. Even from a purely technical perspective, using IPs for Geolocation is not really accurate. Personally, I would have only used the provided City/Country - as
Please make sure that
Of course, we cannot force anyone to do this, but it's more than good practice - maybe even a legal requirement - to inform users about data collection and sending data to third parties. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for interviewing nameless users and reporting back. I've also interviewed 4 users extensively who hold strong views about privacy, and together we evolved from the original prototype of a world map with instruments and names on it. It looked hella cool! But it also freaked people out. The second prototype snapped instruments and even servers to a diamond lattice on a world map. I still find that idea interesting, almost as a "jam planner" but it's just too much information for the task. "Is the display of geolocation data integral to the actual function of the feature implemented?" I could use kilometers/miles but people's understanding of distance is best attuned to distances to cities. Based on today's feedback, I've changed to showing the user's self-described city (if any), followed by the IP's state/province/region. It's still clear to humans, but in most cases it's only as granular as necessary for our purposes. California is kind of long, and Canadian provinces get very big, but the user still has a sense of distance this way, plus cultural identity to a degree. "Why is the default action to have said data collected and displayed instead of opt-in (EU GDPR compliance?)" I want rocket-fuel mad fire features that help us grow and thrive, which translates to: big datasets.
I'm not a data packrat. I avoided storing any data for years. Now I only store data when I see real potential in having a larger dataset, and I only store it for practical durations. I do this because large datasets lead to products that improve outcomes. Now that I know who uses my website (auto-login, released 2 weeks ago), I can produce many more custom features that lead to better outcomes. "Jamulus client software provides fields that users can choose to fill, if they wish, to let others know where they’re located. The fact that when those fields aren’t filled explicitly means they do not wish to advertise more information. Also, users may wish to maintain a degree of anonymity by providing none or arbitrary data. Whatever the reason(s), the decision to supply that data is controlled by the user." This line of thinking is not considering the unique patterns that accompany people who abuse our network by anonymizing with a VPN. The feature you've noticed actually flows out of a "global log" of user activity that I've built to track abusers. There are very good reasons why tracking users is and should be part of our defense of public space. Distance is the best proxy of latency, and navigating latency is a critical facet of success on our platform. My view is that we should reveal enough information users of servers on public directories can use to discover nearby users. An anecdote: My friend noticed two people jamming on a server far away. They've done this for years, but we noticed that one of the guys was located in the city next to my friend's city. So he connected with the guy and they were able to initiate a low-latency jam. They could have been jamming for years! I think every Directory should harvest every Client IP from every Server, and should provide a list of nearby users to every browser that asks. Click the icon in the upper-left of the Client, see this list in a browser. Step back for a moment and remember how we've learned to find people near us within the public network. I'd see someone popping around on local servers, and I'd infer that they might be local to me. That kinda works, but it adds a haze because we're seeing a secondary effect: just seeing which servers the user joins. It should be the goal of Jamulus to tip client users off to other client users near them. This kind of feature, tantalizingly close to us in our Directory architecture, would help us compete with features found in commercial projects that centralize identity management. That's my goal. I want the world's leading live music collaboration community to be a non-commercial, open source platform. To achieve that, we need strategies to compete with some features that centralized, commercial platforms easily provide. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@rdica @softins @elroncam @JacquesFreud Did a quick prototype to "fix" the deterministic ping behaviour, see https://github.com/stefan1000/jamulus/releases/tag/FirstPrototype (just a local windows x64 build). Changes in It will keep pinging for 15 to 30 sec after closing the dialog. In addition the regular 2500ms ping of each server was drastically reduced, servers with lower ping will receive more pings, distant servers with larger pings may only receive very few of those. Dont know if this is stable, will try it out (note that you have to change your jamulus name to trash the hash value) Tooltip on server ping time shows the stats:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I am very sorry for not understanding what all the above is about. Are these measures to stop publishing geolocations like many of the Jamulus users want? (I asked around in a few servers - nobody really finds geolocations necessary or even useful, most don't even care). As it seems, only @mcfnord thinks it is good for Jamulus? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Please stop sending this message to our server. My Imaginary Friends: (09:45:11 PM) EWS GENTLE BUNNY [OFFLINE] aka mcfnord is illegally collecting your Jamulus user data contrary to Jamulus Privacy policies and EU GDPR. See https://github.com/orgs/jamulussoftware/discussions/3545 for more information. To file a complaint regarding your data being collected see https://www.edpb.europa.eu/sme-data-protection-guide/steps-individuals-can-take-against-you_en. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@mcfnord no, I don't think it complies with EU GDPR. The core network function of sending an anonymous UDP payload for ping, which reveals the IP, is likely covered by legitimate interest for operational necessity, provided the server doesn't store the data. However, your activity is fundamentally different. You are collecting the leaked IP address, linking it to a username and a 90-day usage history, sending it to a 3rd party for geolocation, and making the resulting PII publicly available.
Imagine her reaction if she discovered you're storing it, linking it to her username and building up a 90-day history of jamulus activities (with whom, when, for how long...), geolocating her, and publishing parts of this on the internet. Can we even be sure that its only 90 days? Crucially, you do not have my permission—nor the explicit, unambiguous consent of many other users—to store and process this sensitive data. Your suggestion of a "set-by-default opt-in" is contradictory; GDPR requires genuine opt-in consent for this type of non-essential data processing. Your justifications (utility, growth, facilitating real-life meetups) don't meet the legal standard for legitimate interest. The ping time already provides the metric for proximity, and as @JacquesFreud pointed out earlier, real-life connections happen through communication within the application, not through publishing users' locations and session histories. Furthermore, collecting and retaining the PII and session history of all users to combat a few abusers violates the principle of data minimization. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.





Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Purpose
This post is intended to provide information to Jamulus users, and to initiate a meaningful dialogue regarding the recent (20251001) and ongoing exposure of Jamulus user geolocation data on a 3rd party website.
Site
The website exposing Jamulus users geolocation data is https://jamulus.live.
Its owner, @mcfnord, has implemented a new feature that displays users “nearby” to the one viewing the website.
The site collects the following data of each user connecting to public Jamulus servers: their IP addresses and usernames.
The site collects the IP address of the user viewing the website.
The site then performs geolocation lookups on https://ip-api.com using those IP addresses. This data is stored on disk for later processing and display. The data is used by the site to determine “nearby” status of the users currently on public Jamulus servers and the viewer of the site. The “nearby” users names are then displayed on the website along with their geolocated city and region (state/province/other) data.
Security Concerns/PII
How is this data collected since Jamulus software itself does not provide this data?
What legal compliance is being followed in the collection and dissemination of this data?
Is there a privacy policy posted?
Is the display of geolocation data integral to the actual function of the feature implemented?
Why is the default action to have said data collected and displayed instead of opt-in (EU GDPR compliance?)
User Configuration Of Client Pertaining To Location
Jamulus client software provides fields that users can choose to fill, if they wish, to let others know where they’re located. The fact that when those fields aren’t filled explicitly means they do not wish to advertise more information. Also, users may wish to maintain a degree of anonymity by providing none or arbitrary data. Whatever the reason(s), the decision to supply that data is controlled by the user.
Some User Feedback
When users were asked about, or informed of the feature as it currently works, the following points they expressed to myself include but are not limited to:
Discussion
This discussion isn’t a judgement of any feature of the website. @mcfnord caters to his sites users and aims to provide them with what he considers useful information. Rather, it’s an opportunity for him to educate us on the new feature, how he feels it benefits the community, etc.
I invite @mcfnord to discuss the sites new feature, the above concerns I have expressed, and points made by other Jamulus users.
The whole Jamulus community benefits when we all work together on things that impact all users of Jamulus.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions