I call bullshit on tracking pet microchips, if not specifically built for long range operation, tags have a range of a few inches. Carwash, parking, and HOV/pay lane tags will be picked up.
I raised my eyebrows at that, too, since it's not unusual for vets/rescues using scanners to miss a microchip that's migrated. I read that either as a poorly chosen example of the type of tag that can be identified or a badly described GPS tag for pet collars.
They definitely say RFID tags, but yeah, that's not happening with barely one inch range on pet RFID chips.
GPS or fitness trackers use BT. Totally feasible.
And unnecessary, because they will already have tracked your smartphone when you walk your dogs.
Any of this should be completely illegal.
Getting access to fitness trackers and pet collar data requires warrants or very expensive contracts. A network of passive data harvesters breaks no current laws, and has fewer points for renegotiations.
That's what I meant. Even passive tracking should be illegal. Years ago this was a large discussion for then-new 3G networks over here in Germany, and now everybody just collects that data.
You would think! Since law enforcement routinely buys info from commercial data scrapers that they wouldn't be able to get a warrant for, there's a whole lot of fashy fingers that want to get in that pie.