Like Patrol launched on iOS in July with a subscription price of $2.99 per week or $80 per year. The app’s founder, Sergio Luis Quintero, says that fewer than 300 people are currently subscribed. Like Patrol sends notifications to users whenever their target likes or comments on an Instagram post and provides analytics about who they’re interacting with, such as gender and even attractiveness.Originally, Like Patrol referenced data from Instagram’s own creepy “Following” tab, which showed who a user interacted with, their conversations and more. When Instagram discontinued the Following tab, Like Patrol developed its own scraping algorithms to track interactions.

“Scraping violates our policies and we take action against companies who we find to be engaging in it,” a spokesperson from Facebook (which owns Instagram) said to CNET. The company is also reviewing other apps from Like Patrol’s developer that could be violating development guidelines.

People stalking each other on social media is so commonplace that it’s become a cliché. On one hand, users have to accept that anything they post should be considered to be out in the open. On the other, social media companies should be doing more to curb stalkers and limit features that enable creepy behavior. Instagram confronting Like Patrol’s publisher is a step in the right direction.

The apps were frequently pitched as employee and parental monitoring tools, but CNET found that some people weren’t using the app that way. Reviews for Spy Tracker, for instance, included numerous people using the app to stalk romantic partners. The clients were mildly popular — they had 130,000 total downloads.

When asked for comment, Google confirmed to Engadget that it pulled the apps. The company already has policies forbidding these apps and has taken some steps to fight partner abuse, such as donating resources to anti-domestic violence charities like Refuge and working with privacy and security researchers. It also published a study in 2017 to guide privacy and security practices when dealing with abusers.

The app report is a not-so-subtle plug for Avast’s stalking app detection tools, but it also illustrates the challenges Google faces in keeping these kinds of apps out of its catalog. These apps can clear the Play Store’s automated app screening even though they’re designed with malicious intent, and they might not be reported until after they’ve had an opportunity to do some damage.

The vulnerability has to do with the way Bluetooth-enabled devices pair with each other. In that relationship, one device serves as the central connection and the other plays a peripheral role. The peripheral device sends out a signal that contains a unique address — similar to an IP address — and data about the connection. Most devices produce a randomized address which automatically reconfigures periodically. That’s meant to protect users’ privacy, but the BU researchers found that, using an open-source “sniffer” algorithm, they could identify Bluetooth connections even when their addresses changed.

While the vulnerability doesn’t leak personal data, it could be used to track Bluetooth devices and their users. Android might get a pass here. The researchers say Android devices don’t appear to be vulnerable, but Windows 10 and iOS devices can be tracked. FitBit users have it the worst. According to the researchers, FitBits don’t automatically update or randomize their addresses, making them even easier to track.

As a silver lining, thwarting this security gap can be as simple as turning off your Bluetooth connection and then turning it on again — at least for Windows 10 and iOS devices. And don’t get ready to ditch your Bluetooth gadgets just yet. As BU researcher Johannes Becker points out, “There are tons of ways to track people, with or without Bluetooth.” But it’s important to be aware of the signals you’re sending out and who might have access to your sensitive information.

This isn’t the first such lawsuit against Minneapolis for similar behavior, or even other Minnesota cities. It’s the first to go to trial, however, and certainly the first to involve a court-decided payout.

City attorney Susan Segal told Wired she was “disappointed” in the outcome, but stressed that Minneapolis had tightened its restrictions on data in the years since Krekelberg learned of what happened. Employees now have to provide reasons when they access DMV info, for example. And to some extent, this case is only happening because Minnesota had a log of DMV data access — it might not have happened in other states.

The incident also illustrates a perpetual problem with abuses of power when workers have unfettered access to data. Facebook fired an engineer for allegedly using his access to stalk women, while Uber caught flak for not doing enough to stop employees from spying on customers through ‘God View.’ Although these cases are relatively rare, they suggests that governments and companies alike should limit access to a need-to-know basis whenever possible.

Randeep and his brother Gagan (who works for VW) allegedly also run a Twitter account that frequently blasts Musk and Tesla, proclaiming the company’s doom. Previously, users also linked the Hothi brothers to Reddit accounts that moderated a Tesla stock subreddit.

Hothi hasn’t addressed the restraining order so far, although a hearing on Tesla’s request for a longer-lasting order is scheduled for May 7th.

Musk, not surprisingly, isn’t happy. In a response to a Twitter follower who’d learned about the restraining order, the CEO said he’d “never seen anything like it” and was baffled that investors like Hothi would want the company to fail.

This isn’t the first time Tesla has grappled with individuals who allegedly pose threats to the company. It accused a former factory worker of conducting “sabotage” by leaking harmful information to the media, and even said an oil industry exec impersonated him to get sensitive data. Those earlier examples weren’t investors, though, and they certainly didn’t put Tesla employees in physical danger. If the claims are accurate, it’s an escalation that would give Tesla good reason to worry.