I dont get why this is really an issue when there are devices on Temu you can easily buy that are actually designed for stalking. Why would anybody with a genuine nefarious purpose spend their time hacking a tile when they can just buy a generic Chinese gps transponder?
Generic GPS transponder (containing GPS receiver + some kind of data connection) will have limited battery life.
Systems like Tile, AirTag can last much longer with smaller battery and overall dimensions by offloading GPS and long data transmission to other devices. Strength(and dangers) of devices like this is in the size of tracking network not necessarily the hardware itself. Even better if you don't have to plant the tracker onto victim, because victim bought it and is intentionally carrying with themselves.
In that case you have to plant the transponder yourself.
In the case of Tile, everyone using Tile has tagged themselves (unknowingly) for you.
The consumer who didn't know they tagged themselves would understandably have a complaint.
Criminals, particularly heavily disordered ones like stalkers, are usually not the smartest people in the world. So increasing the barrier of entry just a little bit might substantially decrease their practical access to this type of technology.
[dead]
Suppose the person you want to stalk has bought a Tile that they use for themselves, not knowing that these devices are insecure. If you scan for that device, you can follow that person without even having to plant a device on them. You don't have to hack their Tile.
Because it serves a nefarious purpose: to smear the company that makes these devices. I would not be surprised if this is part of some kind of campaign designed to restrict or damage someone.
You went straight to conspiracy?
The title obviously has a slant, because the text of the article doesn't support it. So, yeah, I'm saying the title has a specific goal in mind.
The text seems to support it to me, but more importantly "saying the title has a specific goal" isn't answering the question. Yes the title is calling out the company. What takes you from there to some kind of broader campaign.
I read the article. It absolutely does support the title. Unless you someone consider finger printable devices sending unencrypted location data somehow doesn't enable stalking