Apr
27
2011
--

Vindicated by the big A

Apple released a Q&A about the location data stored on the iPhone.

The iPhone is not logging your location. Rather, it’s maintaining a database of Wi-Fi hotspots and cell towers around your current location, some of which may be located more than one hundred miles away from your iPhone, to help your iPhone rapidly and accurately calculate its location when requested. Calculating a phone’s location using just GPS satellite data can take up to several minutes. iPhone can reduce this time to just a few seconds by using Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data to quickly find GPS satellites, and even triangulate its location using just Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data when GPS is not available (such as indoors or in basements). These calculations are performed live on the iPhone using a crowd-sourced database of Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data that is generated by tens of millions of iPhones sending the geo-tagged locations of nearby Wi-Fi hotspots and cell towers in an anonymous and encrypted form to Apple.

You read it here first. (And second. And third.) Okay, nobody wants to read a post about gloating, but I’m sure enjoying writing it.

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
22
2011
--

Privacy concerns: the big picture

The file with all this location data is stored locally on your own phone or computer. Let’s say, hypothetically, your phone was stolen. They have your email, contacts, photos, text messages and documents. Plus access to any accounts that log in automatically.

Are you really worried about the fact that they also can get a general idea of where you were six months ago?

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
22
2011
--

iPhone location data mystery… solved?

Part of what is so intriguing about this iPhone location data dust-up is the question of why. Why is Apple storing this data on your phone? Are they trying to provide information to law enforcement? Do they have ideas for future apps that look at your location history? Do they want to provide it to advertisers?

Turns out, Apple told us nine months ago. Well, not us, but two of our esteemed Congressmen, Reps. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas). In response to an inquiry about iPhone location data usage, they said (see pages 5 and 6):

To provide the high quality products and services that its customers demand, Apple must have access to comprehensive location-based information. For devices running the iPhone OS versions 1.1 .3 to 3.1, Apple relied on (and still relies on) databases maintained by Google and Skyhook Wireless (“Skyhook”) to provide location-based services. Beginning with the iPhone OS version 3.2 released in April 2010, Apple relies on its own databases to provide location-based services and for diagnostic purposes. These databases must be updated continuously to account for, among other things, the ever-changing physical landscape, more innovative uses of mobile technology, and the increasing number of Apple’s customers. Apple always has taken great care to protect the privacy of its customers.

Basically, when you can’t get a good GPS signal, your iPhone guesses based on WiFi and cell sites near you. Apple used to rely on other people’s databases of where WiFi and cell locations are, but now they do it in house. How do they do this?

To provide location-based services, Apple must be able to determine quickly and precisely where a device is located. To do this, Apple maintains a secure database containing information regarding known locations of cell towers and Wi-Fi access points. The information is stored in a database accessible only by Apple and does not reveal personal information about any customer.

Information about nearby cell towers and Wi-Fi access points is collected and sent to Apple with the GPS coordinates of the device, if available: (1) when a customer requests current location information and (2) automatically, in some cases, to update and maintain databases with known location information. In both cases, the device collects the following anonymous information:

  • Cell Tower Information: Apple collects information about nearby cell towers, such as the location of the tower(s), Cell IDs, and data about the strength of the signal transmitted from the towers. A Cell ID refers to the unique number assigned by a cellular provider to a cell, a defined geographic area covered by a cell tower in a mobile network. Cell IDs do not provide any personal information about mobile phone users located in the cell. Location, Cell ID, and signal strength information is available to anyone with certain commercially available software.
  • Wi-Fi Access Point Information: Apple collects information about nearby Wi-Fi access points, such as the location of the access point(s), Media Access Control (MAC) addresses, and data about the strength and speed of the signal transmitted by the access point(s)…

The consolidated.db is the file is how they store that data locally on the phone1. The cell tower information is in the CellLocation table. The WiFi access point information is in the WiFiLocation table. There is also a table called CdmaCellLocation - for me it’s empty, but I’d be willing to bet that people with a CDMA (Verizon) iPhone will find if chock full of cell locations. As I’ve been saying all along, these tables are of the locations of the access points, and when you’re in those areas again, your phone can look at what kinds of signal strength is has with them to determine it’s own location. It does this because this takes much less battery than locking on to a GPS signal, and although the accuracy isn’t as good, for many applications it’s good enough.

I suspect the data in these tables is probably two way - you upload some anonymized data to Apple about cell and wifi locations that you have located, and Apple may send some back that other anonymous people have located. That would explain why we all get weird data from time to time for places we haven’t been - for some reason Apple pushed out cell locations to us because an App requested data about that location. Or maybe it knows about cell locations that have been moved and wanted everyone to have accurate information. I know this is just a hypothesis but it’s a much better explanation than I’ve heard from anyone else.

Now in this document, Apple says that when they send the approximate locations of the cell sites and WiFi access points, they also are sending the GPS coordinates (if available). However, there is no evidence that I can find that they are storing those coordinates on the phone. The coordinates are sent to Apple, which stores them in an anonymous database on their end. They aren’t in the consolidated.db anywhere - at least not that I can find. They’re definitely not in the CellLocation table that iPhoneTracker uses, because GPS coordinates tend to be very precise and nothing in that table has an accuracy of closer than 500 meters.

Why store a whole year’s worth of data? Because that’s the whole point! In order to find your location without using GPS, you want a huge database of where cell towers are and what their location is. Now Apple could probably do this in a way that better protects your privacy - they could munge the timestamps more effectively, or take all the data whenever you sync and replace it with more reliable cell location data from their servers that covers the areas that you frequently travel. Kind of like Genius syncing in iTunes; they look at where you’ve been, and give you reliable cell and wifi locations based on those locations. Smart, elegant, and secure. Why they do it this way is unclear, and surely they will provide an additional clarification now that more people are asking questions.

1. To clarify, this is my opinion. Apple has not said exactly what the purpose of the consolidated.db file is, and until they do, we won’t know for sure. I strongly suspect this is the purpose of the file, for reasons mentioned both in this post and other posts on my blog.

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
21
2011
--

Reaction to The Register article

Dan Goodin put together a pretty good article on the iPhone tracking issue, “No, iPhone location tracking isn’t harmless and here’s why.” I have to take issue with how casually he disregarded my assertion that what is being stored in the database is cell locations and not the device’s location, but he was trying to show both sides. After all, Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden are researchers and I’m a blogger.

However, I still think I’m right. And in Dan’s defense, he hadn’t read my most recent post when he put the article together, so he hadn’t seen my evidence regarding the non-overlapping “halos” in the data points.

In the article, Alasdair and Pete were indirectly quoted as saying:

Some of the extracted databases they examined plotted literally thousands of unique coordinates in a small part of a single city. It’s almost impossible that there could be that many corresponding nodes in such a confined area, they said.

I believe this is because what the iPhone is doing is guessing the network nodes’ position using its GPS. They are so many unique ones because they are different guesses at different times.

I think the distinction of exactly what data the iPhone is collecting is important, because it speaks to both what level of detail we’re talking about and what Apple’s motivations are for collecting that data. I hope this is settled by Apple, and I still believe the evidence is on my side.

Where I agree with Dan, Alasdair, and Pete is that it isn’t, as The Register puts it, “harmless.” Alasdair said it can place you “a bit above the block level” and I’d say it’s more like neighborhood level, but yes. It can place you at around that level. Being able to access that level of data on someone is not good. And even in the cases where the data is really inaccurate, it’s bad because law enforcement is using this inaccurate data to prosecute or question potentially innocent people!

Another thing I noticed, however, is that it is not always collecting this data. In my 1+ years of using iOS 4 and collecting data, I only have 1112 distinct timestamps in my data. That’s about three times a day - hardly enough to determine my jogging route or reveal to my girlfriend which of her friends I’m cheating on her with. (It’s a joke! I love you baby!)

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
21
2011
--

Apple is not “recording your moves,” Urban Edition!

(Previously: Apple is not “recording your moves”)

A lot of people have said that while the data from my backcountry bike trip is interesting, there is still a large security concern for people that live in cities. Since the urban density of “cell phone towers” (or more realistically, wireless network nodes) is much greater, couldn’t someone who stole your iPhone find you in a city much more easily?

From the data I’m seeing, no. I have been looking through the table of my data more thoroughly and what I’ve found is interesting. It doesn’t log one data point at a time - it will log a couple dozen data points all at once. For example, here is my data visualized on a graph, for the timestamp of April 3rd at 5:15:25.865 PM:

Somewhere in Philadelphia

Somewhere in Philadelphia

Ignore the lines that are drawn - the utility I used to convert the points to something readable by Google Earth adds them. All the points were added to the file with the exact same timestamp. What gets interesting is when you start looking at the data behind these points. Take a look at the following two screenshots:
Point One
Point Two
Note the Horizontal Accuracy of the two points. This is a measure, in meters, of the confidence in that location - like when you load up maps and it shows a blue “halo” around your location indicating the area you may be in. The first point has an accuracy of 549 meters, the second 500 meters - and they are over 2000 meters from each other. Now, if these data points are supposed to be where you are, then their horizontal accuracies should all overlap on some point that reveals your actual location. But they don’t - which is why I believe they are locations of nearby cell sites, and the horizontal accuracy is a measure of how confident it is that the cell is there.

“But it’s still very revealing!” you must be thinking. After all, if it’s cell sites around you, you must be right in the middle of that circle. Fortunately for my privacy, no. At 5:15 PM on April 3rd I was in the bottom left of that circle, over a block away from the nearest dot on the map. I had just finished a 155 mile bike trip and was pretty happy to be sitting there, not moving.

A vast majority of the data in consolidated.db is in clumps like this. I grouped all the data by timestamp and found that 68% of the groups (and 96% of the points) were in clumps of more than 12 points.

Of the 40k valid entries in my CellLocation table, there were 106 entries with just a single timestamp. I looked at several of these, thinking I had perhaps found something that would give a close indication of my actual location. Still, no. One was at 1:30 AM, and it was 700 meters, or seven blocks, away from where I lay asleep, despite claiming an accuracy of 500 meters. Interestingly, this was in downtown Seattle, where there were tons of other cell nodes that it could have logged. Why did it pick just this one? Who knows.

Now there may be individual points in your consolidated.db file that happen to be the exact same as your location at the time. I’m sure there are some in mine. But that that is coincidental - the phone seems to be logging locations of nodes on the wireless cell network, and their presence in the file mean that you MAY have been near them. The Las Vegas mystery is still confounding me, but it only further proves the point that this data should not be relied on for any kind of forensic analysis.

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
21
2011
--

What (doesn’t) happen in Vegas, stays on your iPhone

Fire up your iPhoneTracker and zoom in on southern Nevada. Remember that fun trip?

I don’t either. Neither does my coworker, who apparently took the exact same trip around the same time, late June. My bet is that your iPhone has these same points. Did we all drink that much? Was there a convention of amnesiac iPhone users?

Las Vegas Map for Will Clarke Las Vegas Map for D2
Data from my iPhone Data from @bp1222’s iPhone

This is what concerns me about the idea that these data points are your location. If forensics experts are supposedly using this file to pinpoint suspects’ locations and help prosecute them for crimes, shouldn’t we be SURE that what’s in these tables are really location data and not cell phone tower location?1

Here are the data points from my phone, from Vegas:

Timestamp Latitude Longitude Horizontal Accuracy
299183575.518057 36.42393219 -115.39707958 2549.0
299183575.518057 36.38181227 -115.37701904 2622.0
299183575.518057 36.46913003 -115.44647067 1030.0
299183575.518057 36.46861606 -115.44789755 2837.0
299183575.518057 36.36917614 -115.35957294 2782.0
299183575.518057 36.36333626 -115.35199129 1530.0
299183575.518057 36.36041134 -115.34166538 2551.0
299183575.518057 36.36049932 -115.33027505 2353.0
299183575.518057 36.49515825 -115.49839264 2872.0
299183575.518057 36.49757117 -115.49900907 2709.0
299183575.518057 36.3041771 -115.40962135 500.0
299183575.518057 36.30460888 -115.41722583 697.0
299183575.518057 36.32789695 -115.29256647 500.0
299183575.518057 36.32790172 -115.29153209 500.0
299183575.518057 36.32790309 -115.29110014 2795.0
299183575.518057 36.30432605 -115.33195531 500.0
299183575.518057 36.30418097 -115.33188027 500.0
299183575.518057 36.30395781 -115.33031117 500.0
299183575.518057 36.30274063 -115.33094429 1315.0
299183575.518057 36.31804084 -115.29408824 1912.0
299183575.518057 36.31821024 -115.29372918 500.0

The “Horizontal Accuracy” field is what the iPhone uses to give the radius of confidence for a point on a map. It is in meters. When you see the little blue dot with a circle around it in Maps, that’s the Horizontal Accuracy. The Timestamp is in seconds since January 1st, 2001.

Why would there be so many points in there with a relatively high accuracy, all registered at the exact same time? If my theory that the data points are cell phone towers is correct, then maybe it gets these records from the network? Maybe some bug with AT&T sent out the approximate location of cell towers in Las Vegas to all our iPhones and they all diligently cached them away? I am going to do some more digging but this certainly is getting interesting…

1. I have frequently been saying “cell tower” location. This terminology is anachronistic, usually what your phone is communicating with is not a “tower” but a wireless network node on the side of some building, more akin to the WiFi base station in your house.

Written by Will Clarke in: Programming |
Apr
20
2011
--

Apple is not “recording your moves”

A pretty sensational piece was published on O’Reilly Radar this morning titled “Got an iPhone or 3G iPad? Apple is recording your moves.” From their article:

Today at Where 2.0 Pete Warden and I will announce the discovery that your iPhone, and your 3G iPad, is regularly recording the position of your device into a hidden file. Ever since iOS 4 arrived, your device has been storing a long list of locations and time stamps. We’re not sure why Apple is gathering this data, but it’s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.

They also released an application, iPhoneTracker that you can use to browse the data. In the FAQ they ask:

Why is Apple collecting this information?
It’s unclear. One guess might be that they have new features in mind that require a history of your location, but that’s pure speculation. The fact that it’s transferred across devices when you restore or migrate is evidence the data-gathering isn’t accidental.

I don’t mean to denigrate the work they’ve done. Nor do I mean to imply that there aren’t security concerns with this file. But after looking at the raw data that the iPhone stores, I want to point out that it seems that they are technically incorrect. Apple is not storing the device’s location, it’s storing the location of the towers that the device is communicating with.


How do you know?

When I first read the article, I was both concerned and intrigued. Obviously storing a ton of detailed location data for a period of a year is a concern, but I was also interested in what kind of data my phone had on it. After all, I just finished a fun weekend bike tour, and it would be neat to see the detailed route we took. I was using the Maps application a lot and it was giving me very accurate information at the time, so I figured surely there would be at least portions of the route that would be very detailed.

When I used their application, I was disappointed. They throw all the data points on a grid heat map that doesn’t give you much detail. They do this intentionally; they want you to see that it stores the data while not providing a tool that can be easily exploited by others. But that wasn’t good enough for me.

So I followed their instructions to get at the raw data. I extracted the location database from my last iPhone backup, used SQLite to limit it to just the data points during my bike trip and data points that were within a certain level of accuracy, exported this data to a CSV file, used an online tool to convert this to KML, and imported my route into Google Earth.

What I found was disappointing. Almost all the points were way off. Here is a map that is generated from Google Earth; the red points are the ones pulled from my phone. The blue line is the route we actually took to get to Long Beach Island and the Orange Line is the route we used to leave.

Click for larger version

Click for larger version

We did not do anything on the island at all. We went straight ahead to the beach, took a picture, and then turned around and went back.

Now keep in mind, I was using the iPhone’s GPS constantly, and it was giving me very good readings. It had me exactly along Main St near Tuckertown, where I actually was. I took a photo on the beach, and it geotagged me with almost the exact location. Yet none of these very accurate points were in the dataset that is stored on the phone. Instead, the datapoints were all along the highway, where I definitely wasn’t, or in nearby towns, which we biked around.

The datasets also contain accuracy information. I am limiting the results to only data points that claim to be accurate within 1500 meters. However most of them are much farther than that from my known route - for example, the ones on the Garden State Parkway are more than twice that distance away. And those individual points claim an accuracy of less than 1000 meters.

The only thing that makes sense is that the iPhone is actually storing the locations of the cell phone towers that it communicates with. My guess is that the iPhone uses this data to help it locate cell towers if it is in the same location again in the future.

Other Indications

Here is other evidence I’ve found to confirm this theory:

  • The name of the table this data is stored in is CellLocation. Other tables in the DB include WifiLocation and CdmaCellLocation. These names strongly indicate that they are used to store locations of access points, not of the device itself.
  • I looked at the data from a friend’s phone who traveled recently to Germany. While there, he used his iPhone roaming on their 3G network. He took a lot of photos, many of them geotagged correctly, meaning a lot of location information was stored. But there were no points stored in the CellLocation table in Germany. So it’s probably only collecting data about the location of cell towers on the phone’s primary network (meaning AT&T). UPDATE: I was wrong - he had it in Airplane Mode with WiFi on in Germany, so it was geotagging based on WiFi positioning. I’ve talked to another friend who confirmed that it DOES collect data abroad.
  • None of the points in the table have an accuracy of more than 500 meters. That’s probably the best a phone can do to place an individual cell phone tower, but triangulation with multiple cell towers can place a device on a map much more accurately.
  • Note the way-off points on the above map on Long Beach Island. When crossing the bridge, I should have had incredible accuracy since I was over water. It should have placed me right on the bridge. Instead, what I had was incredible accuracy to see the far-away towers. It was alternating between recording towers behind me and towers in front of me.

Who cares? This still means there is a log of where I’ve been!

Yes, it does. Like I said originally, I’m not saying there aren’t privacy concerns here. I just think we should be honest about what they are. According to the Huffington Post, “your iPhone or iPad is keeping a record of every step you take.” The Guardian claimed the phone “saves every detail of [where you go] to a secret file on the device.”

The data that is exposed basically reveals which city you were in at a given time. Nothing more specific than that. It can’t tell what house you live in, it can’t tell what route you jog on, nothing like that. It’s misleading because people know their phone can locate them within several meters of their actual location. But if all it’s showing is cell tower location, you could be anywhere within a 2 to 3 mile radius. That’s several orders of magnitude less precise.

There is also the issue of motivation. If Apple was collecting data on the user’s location, for use in future apps that “require a history of your location” as the researchers speculate, then that is pretty creepy. Nobody would want that, and it would be a huge breach of trust to collect data with that level of specificity. But if they are just collecting data about cell tower locations, perhaps because it helps you get a better signal in the future or improve network reliability, and they do so in a way that doesn’t reveal very much about your location, that’s certainly less creepy.

UPDATE: I’ve added a new post with a bunch of details about how the tracking works in an urban environment, and still believe what it’s tracking is cell nodes and not your location. Check it out

Apr
19
2011
0

Hello Potential Roommate

If you’re viewing this, it’s probably because I emailed you about a place to live and you are stalking me before replying. It’s cool. When you reply, I’ll probably use your email address to do the same to you.

Feel free to read my posts, but I thought I’d just preface this with the fact that I don’t post to my blog very often and when I do it’s about random things that probably don’t “define” me very well. Also, the “About” section is very old and for some reason my blog software won’t let me edit it. I could take time to figure it out but I don’t really care. Enjoy the investigation! And email me back, damnit.

Written by Will Clarke in: Uncategorized |
Apr
02
2011
0

Where do you camp?

(This is Part 2 in a series where I answer common questions about bike touring. See Part 1.)

When doing a loaded tour, by far the most fun part of the trip is finding a place to camp for the night. I rarely plan a place to camp - typically, I wait until about an hour before the sun goes down, and then start looking.

As you might imagine, this can be a stressful experience, and for several reasons. First, it’s kind of illegal. Setting up a tent in a public place without permission is technically vagrancy. Second, you have limited time to find a place, because setting up a tent in the dark is difficult and the sun is setting before your eyes. And third, you might not find a place at all, frantically biking until you’re run over by a drunk redneck.

But you always find a place. Always.

There are tons of places to camp once you’re out of the city, including:

  • Playgrounds
  • Baseball fields
  • Non-RV campgrounds
  • Fraternal organizations
  • Church grounds
  • Fire stations
  • Schools
  • People’s yards
  • The side of the road

These last two are there for a reason: they are last resorts. There is a trick with camping in people’s yards - you find a nice looking house, tell them your story, and ask them if they know of a campground nearby. They won’t, and if they take pity on you then they will offer their yard. I’ve never actually used this technique, and Eoin has only once to no avail. The point is, you rarely have to get that far down the list.

There are a number of strategies when public place camping. One is ambiguity: camp between two public properties so whoever is in charge of each may assume the other gave you permission. Another is seclusion: find the place that you won’t be seen, and therefore not questioned. And the last is to have a good excuse.

This is how the legend of Ed Rollins was invented. On our last tour around Pennsylvania, about five days in, Eoin and I were frantically searching for a place to camp. The day had been rainy and overcast, and due to the cloud cover, it started getting darker sooner than expected. We started unloading at one potential site, a lot behind a transportation department office. But about 15 minutes after we started unloading, a bright flood light came on from the office, one of those timed lights that come on at a designated time in the evening.

Nightfall was fully upon us, and we had to relocate. This is, for a cycling tourist, the worst case scenario. On top of this, my knees were shot and I didn’t want to bike any further. So Eoin went out and scouted a new potential spot.

A few minutes later, he had found one - a set of pavilions in what seemed like a public park (this late at night, it was hard to tell). I followed him there and we began to set up. The downside of this location is that it was across the street from a bunch of houses, full of potentially nosy citizens, a cyclist’s nightmare. As we set up our tents with flashlights and head lamps, we envisioned their frantic calls to the authorities: “Sheriff! We got a couplea boys down here, settin’ up tents in the dark!” I wasn’t going to move again. I don’t care what the sheriff says.

So I came up with an excuse. If we were questioned, we’d say that Ed Rollins, from the department of Public Works, has asked us to travel across the state and chart bike routes for his employer. We’d need to have our story straight, so we began adding details: Ed Rollins fought in Vietnam. He blew out his knee so he can’t travel himself. His wife is Susan. She makes a superb green bean casserole. You know why it’s so good? It’s a secret! (The secret is that she only uses the freshest ingredients - a secret we promised to only divulge under intense pressure from the Sheriff).

It was preposterous and would never work, but it helped us feel better about the situation. We could hear people coming and going from the nearby houses. Each time we did, we all dropped to the ground and turned off our lights. We were paranoid.

Of course, nothing ever happened. Nothing ever does. In all our travels, we’ve never had anyone give us more than a second thought. And why should they? We’re clean, we don’t build fires or cause damage, and we leave no trace. For anyone harboring objections to our flagrant disrespect for the law, keep in mind that we break the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

In an abstract sense, loitering and vagrancy laws are absurd. Think about it - it’s illegal, as a human being, to exist somewhere for too long. And this is on public land, land that ostensibly belongs to us as members of the public. Now, I get it - if the laws didn’t exist, there would be problems. I’m not saying the laws aren’t important. I am just selfishly and hypocritically carving out exceptions for me and Eoin. If you’re thinking about taking our advice and camp similarly, please leave no trace.

Of course, not all camping opportunities are illegal. Tonight, Eoin and I are enjoying the hospitality of the Surf City chapter of the Loyal Order of the Moose, a fraternal organization that allowed us to camp in their yard and consume Yuengling in their lodge bar for an outrageous $1.75 per pint.

Between Eoin and I, we have slept in the yard of author T.J. Jackson Lears, on church grounds, inside a community center, and from people on the internet we contacted. That’s another source of legal camping - there are a few web sites, such as couchsurfing.org and tastefully named warmshowers.org, that help travelers find camping and lodging with others. The drawback of this resource is that you need to know approximately when and where you will be in a particular place.

And when you badly need a shower, And there is always a motel. Or, since we lack motors, perhaps a bitel? No, that’s silly, but that’s what happens when your belly is full of cheap fraternal brew. Time to sign off - stay tuned for future updates!

Written by Will Clarke in: Bike Touring |
Apr
02
2011
0

What is bike touring?

I’m getting ready for my first bike tour of the season. After a long winter, northeast weather has finally shaped up on a weekend I have free, and so my travel partner Eoin and I will take to the backcountry roads and make our way from downtown Philadelphia to Surf City NJ and back. It’s about 140 miles round trip, or about 70 miles per day.

When I tell people about the bike trips I do, they look at me like I’m crazy. Sometimes it’s more than a look - they tell me I’m crazy. “But that’s only two hours by car!” I was told recently by a friend. “I could never do that!” said a coworker.

Both of these comments are wrong in their own way; the latter is factually incorrect and the former misses the point. Yes, you can get to Surf City in two hours from Philadelphia in a car. In fact, you can do it in an hour and a half. But the goal when touring isn’t the destination, it’s the experience of the journey - seeing the landscape fade between urban and rural, exploring new places at a mentally digestible pace, and seeing the parts of America not homogenized by the Interstate Highway System. It’s fun, and anyone can do it.

Since I think a lot of the confused responses I get from people about my touring hobby stems from them not knowing what what it is, I thought I’d take some time to write up an explanation of bike touring. Read on, and as I complete the tour over the course of the weekend, I am going to update this with our experiences.

Touring for Dummies

Bike touring is traveling long distances by bike. This sounds simple, but can be done many ways. Some people travel with a crew helping them - these are usually charity fundraisers of some sort - while others are self supported. Some carry lots of gear with them, others travel unloaded, staying in hotels and buying anything they need along the way.

I’m an advocate of self-supported, loaded touring. I’ve had the opportunity to participate in supported tours, but in my opinion, that takes a lot of the adventure out of it. I enjoy touring because there is planning and unexpected challenges that come up that test your versatility. With an inflexible route and a support crew, there is none of that. You just bike along the dotted line on the map. At my local gym there is a cycling machine with a high-def LCD screen that makes it look like you’re biking outside. I don’t use this machine for the same reason that I don’t do supported touring.

Loaded touring is bike backpacking. But it’s better than backpacking, because you can cover a lot more distance and since you rarely stray far from civilization, you don’t have to carry several days worth of food (provided you’re willing to occasionally deign to consume food of the fast variety). Camping is fun and seems cheaper than hotels, although I’m sure if I compared the amount of money I’ve spent on camping gear to the cost of your average rural motel times the number of nights I’ve been camping, it would be a wash.

What roads do you take?

This is always one of the first questions I get about touring. People act like interstates are the only way to get around. This notion is logical - while the Interstate Highway system accounts for around 1% of the total road mileage in America, almost a third of our miles are logged there. Most people know only the streets around their city and the interstates to escape it. Beyond that, well, that’s what Garmin is for.

So while the 46 thousand miles of the Interstate Highway system are off limits1, there are over 4 million miles of roads that criss-cross the country, a vast majority of them imminently bikeable. The problem is, of course, that there is no way to determine a road’s bike friendliness from a map. Roads are weight-coded according to the density of their traffic, but what about their shoulder? This information is oddly omitted.

To solve this problem, many bike organizations make maps specifically for touring cyclists. The most prominent, the Adventure Cycling Association, sells maps of popular, bike friendly routes all around the country. The maps include detailed map sections and cue sheets for travel in either direction, with details about other bikable roads and alternative routes if you want to take them.

However, just because we ride a 19th century invention doesn’t mean we want to use 19th century navigational tools. So in March of last year, Google helped us leapfrog into the 21st by adding biking directions to Google Maps. Now, whenever you get directions, a simple click of a button generates a bike friendly route which not only includes roads but bike trails and lanes in most US cities.

There are problems. On one occasion, Google directed me onto a collapsed bridge, and on several others it put me on what can only very loosely be called bike paths. One seemed more like a sand pit. The main problem is that while Google Maps understands bikes, it doesn’t understand that not all bikes are the same. A road bike cant ride on gravel, period. There needs to be a way you can tell it to avoid these types or paths.

But I nitpick. Overall, the new biking directions have been a boon to touring cyclists. They have opened up tons of new places to explore, and Saturday morning, Eoin and I are doing just that. We’ll be traveling through the Pine Barrens in New Jersey and then to the coast where we will dip our feet in the water before turning our bikes around and heading back to Philadelphia. I hope to continue to blog the trip as we travel or, failing that, I will post time-delayed updates once I get home.

1. This is yet another area that American Exceptionalism is at risk - this year, China is set to overtake the US in the size of it’s intercity expressway system, their equivalent of our Interstate Highway program.

Written by Will Clarke in: Bike Touring |

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Aeros 2.0 by TheBuckmaker.com