A Vortex of Beacons (or "Bluetooth Everywhere" Vision)
Bluetooth is not a new thing, nor a new concern. When I was a teenager Bluetooth was still a new thing and many things adopted it over time.
Bluetooth has some competition, set aside mobile devices, Wi-Fi etc. Let's set aside those specifics and the differences (not all are on par; the needs and specs vary). My Palm PDA (in 2026) still has IR - a very short-distance thing that is invoked manually, e.g. to exchange a memo.
Today we discussed a disturbing amount (or a very high number) of home gadgets that have Bluetooth, making it impossible to turn it off, or keep it on ('dimmed down' at best) when the user explicitly turns it off. Sort of like Google with "Location" in Android. 8 years ago I had to explain to the Consulate near here (Leeds) that Google ignores such settings.
Many Bluetooth devices are wearables, so actual human beings carry around with them a Bluetooth signal with several unique IDs (easy to confidently and accurately map onto a person given enough data for inference). Nothing necessarily needs to actually connect to them, just detect their mere existence and the self-identifying packet/s they passively broadcast.
Bluetooth is not a high-intensity standard or some 'weird' wavelength. Many of the above-mentioned things are akin to radio, except unlike tuners they're not mere receivers but non-stop broadcasters that churn away batteries, causing faster 'wear and tear' (shortening the lifetime or whatever they're attached to).
In the case of water meters, they're thankfully based outside the fences - far from the structure of the home. There's no way they can get any valuable information ("telemetry") on us except when we use water and how much. That's worse than what we used to have (the old meters functioned just fine and I blogged about them several times last year). The new ones have greater spying capacity and offer no benefit to us. None.
If you purchase a device and it does not advertise the presence of "beacon"-like functionality, do not assume that it lacks it. It doesn't need to be Bluetooth, there are other means of communicating with adjacent objects (low-cost chips exist for that). Some of those other objects (e.g. modern "smart" "phone") can relay everything 'upstream' to mother ship GAFAM every minute, overnight for larger covert "payloads", or whatever.
The best and most reliable fix in many cases is to be a stickler (to old things). In the case of water meters, they're not owned by the tenant, the suppliers own them all. So there's no choice. Electric "smart" meters are another type of issue as they're almost always lodged indoors and future incarnations of them will likely have microphones - maybe cameras too - maybe in the name of 'security' (e.g. from tampering).
If someone (or someones) calls you paranoid for taking about "beacon"-like functionality, there will be no lack of authoritative citations (e.g. Web links) they can be provided to prove them wrong. Call them "ignorant" for saying that.
The views expressed here are not "crazy" or outlandish. They just happen to be suppressed and typically brought up with (or by) technology folks who are more literate w.r.t. jargon/terminology.
I'm reminded that Louis Rossmann had a video about Bluetooth tracking the other day, as we noted in IRC that same day. "The Bluetooth OUIs are certainly quickly linked with a real-life identity along with all the other data collected," I'm told. And "apropos DEFCON which ended the other day, here is an old reference" (regarding Bluetooth, used extensively to track activists who should know better). This is a "major security risk" which prevails "24/7" (mainstream media report) and nowadays the average car has a Bluetooth signal, too. "In each case," I'm told, "there is also probably stolen Linux involved..."
"I suspect that each tire on the car has a BLE beacon too, not just the radio etc," an associate notes. Cars are a large ensemble of computers.
IEEE Spectrum has an old article about Bluetooth (in)security, the US government speaks of "nefarious" Bluetooth tracking, and it is a very real risk.
These are not "crackpot" sites, those are very serious sites. █
More references:
-
Bluetooth's Complexity Has Become a Security Risk | WIRED
-
Update now! Bluetooth flaw lets attackers silently hijack accessories | PCWorld
-
FCC warns to turn off Bluetooth when not in use | What the Tech? - KOB 4
-
Why Your Bluetooth Devices Aren’t as Secure as You Think
-
Don’t be a victim: leaving your phone’s Bluetooth on is a major security risk