- Grab Philippines rolled out the tech feature in October 2024 while appealing the government’s 2020 cease and desist order on it.
- A data privacy expert says there is reason to believe the ban is still in effect.
- Drivers embrace AudioProtect, but passengers do not recall giving consent to be recorded.
- The company maintains that they are compliant with privacy laws.
- A digital welfare advocate is urging the government to tighten regulation.
January 27 was a day of justice for Grab Car driver Jerricho Narvaez who was cleared of a sexual harassment allegation from a student-passenger.
Grab, the country’s most dominant ride-hailing application, partly based its findings on the recording of Narvaez and the student’s ride.
“After a comprehensive review of the AudioProtect recording from the trip, the driver-partner’s profile, and performance history, we found no conclusive evidence to support the allegations or indicate any malicious intent,” the company said in a statement.
The platform’s driver-partners rejoiced for Narvaez.
But some Grab users called it an invasion of their privacy. It was their first time to find out about AudioProtect, the company’s tech feature that records GrabCar rides, and they do not recall Grab ever asking their permission to be recorded.
The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) learned that Grab rolled out AudioProtect in October 2024 while appealing the government’s cease and desist order (CDO) on the pilot testing of the tech feature.
In January 2020, the National Privacy Commission (NPC) stopped Grab’s pilot testing of the feature after discovering “deficiencies that may endanger the privacy rights of the riding public.”
Grab Philippines’ privacy counsel Joan Medalla told PCIJ that the company has since filed multiple motions to lift the order.
She said the company addressed the issues by submitting relevant documents and eventually secured a Certificate of No Significant Findings from the NPC’s Compliance and Monitoring Division (CMD) in May last year.
“We are confident about our privacy posture. The (certificate), along with our privacy certifications within the (Southeast Asia) region, is a testament to our robust framework,” said the counsel.
Grab Philippines’ mobility director EJ Dela Vega said the certificate, “to some extent,” gave them confidence to roll out AudioProtect.
“We know that the implementation of AudioProtect is fully compliant with privacy regulations. We also received the Certificate of No Significant Findings. So on the basis of these two points, we decided to roll it out,” Dela Vega told PCIJ.
CDO ‘still in effect’
PCIJ asked the NPC about the status of its halt order. PCIJ will update this story once the commission responds.
But for data privacy expert Jam Jacob, if there’s no NPC final resolution on Grab’s multiple motions, “there’s reason to believe that the CDO is still in effect.”
“If it is in effect, then doing something you have been explicitly ordered to not do amounts to an administrative offense,” he told PCIJ, referring to NPC Circular No. 2022-01.
He pointed to the circular’s provision under “other infractions,” which states that “(a)ny natural or juridical person processing personal data that fails to comply with any order, resolution, or decision of the commission, or of any of its duly authorized officers… shall be subject to an administrative fine not exceeding fifty thousand pesos (Php 50,000).”
Jacob said that Grab should have waited for the order to be lifted first before rolling out its system to avoid risks.
“The commission can decide to lift the order based on the certificate. But a mere division cannot simply preempt that move and undo an order,” he said.
Jacob said that the NPC commissioners can still decide not to adopt the findings of its division – CMD – and instead require additional requirements.
“If the NPC simply relied on submissions and explanations by Grab, their ‘findings’ may not hold that much water. Which is why it is more important that any action should come from the commission themselves,” he said.
If the NPC simply relied on submissions and explanations by Grab, their ‘findings’ may not hold that much water. Which is why it is more important that any action should come from the commission themselves.
Atty. Jam jacob, data privacy expert
Passenger notices
Grab’s use of AudioProtect has taken riders by surprise.
“Honestly, I only learned about it when I read the statement of Grab about the recent incident with the student and the Grab driver,” Steph Ongkiko, a former TV reporter, told PCIJ.
Ian Yap aired out his concern on X (formerly Twitter): “When was this feature rolled out? Not even an in-app prompt that we are being recorded?”
Felicity Mercado shared with PCIJ that she was dumbfounded: “I don’t know if I missed the memo or if the app informed me through a notification.”
But Grab maintained that passengers were notified about it prior to their first booked ride following AudioProtect’s launch and in at least three more booked rides after.
“The most visible one would have been that in-app prompt… But they were (also) prompted in the chat or SMS that it’s enabled if they want to disable it. And then if they want to disable, no recording actually happens,” Dela Vega said.
He was firm that the company exhausted all its means to inform users: “I believe (we) utilized the channels to the best of our ability.”
But Ronald Gustilo, spokesperson for the advocacy group Digital Pinoys, believed there were gaps in Grab’s rollout of the feature since the notices slipped past users, including some who remained unaware about it months later.
“Kung meron man silang way na pinaalam yun dun sa gumagamit ng app nila, kulang yung ginawa nila kasi talagang hindi alam e,” he said.
(If they had a way of asking permission through their app, it was not enough because users are still unaware.)
‘Invasion of privacy’
Passengers can disable the feature through the application’s “Safety Center” upon booking a ride. They can also turn it off any time through the Safety Settings under the Profile menu.
But not all passengers are aware they can do this or that they are being recorded at all.
One Grab user shared that she didn’t know that AudioProtect could be turned off the first time she encountered it on a trip. So she just left it on.
Users also expressed concerns that the feature was enabled for them as a default.
“This is not an opt-in feature since it was automatically activated. Surprised to see (my) phone’s mic is being accessed by your app,” Yap posted on X, tagging Grab Philippines’ account.
“Regardless if I want to be recorded, I will decide for myself. This, for me, is an invasion of privacy since I was not informed about it, regardless if it was meant for my safety,” he added.
Meanwhile, Mercado said that she “would’ve preferred it if there was a notice or option for me to consent before riding a GrabCar… Consent is when someone asks if you agree, not if you choose to disagree.”
Grab decided to maximize the adoption of AudioProtect among users, Dela Vega said.
“Because we believe in the tech, we believe in the security of our technology, we believe in the ultimate benefit of the technology, a greater adoption is better… The only thing we want is to maximize safety… And we respect your decision if you choose to opt out,” the Grab executive explained.
The Data Privacy Act of 2012 defines consent of data subjects as “any freely given, specific, informed indication of will, whereby the data subject agrees to the collection and processing of personal information about and/or relating to him or her.”
Still, Gustilo insisted that Grab fell short of getting the consent of passengers who have become data subjects the moment they hopped inside the GrabCar.
How it works
Once a passenger enters a car and AudioProtect is left on, that’s when the phone automatically records. Should the passenger decide to turn it off during the actual trip, the feature will be disabled on future rides, but the recording for the current one continues.
“You could argue that you should have the option at all times. But then it’s always a balancing act because the trade-off is if you’re allowed (to turn it off during the ride), you could have ill intent then,” Dela Vega explained.
“That’s why we chose to have a proactive shield against those issues, rather than cutting it too close or too tight wherein we have to arm you at the very last minute with the (reactive) sword,” he added.
The only time a recording will stop mid-trip is when the passenger receives a call on his or her phone, Dela Vega said.
Digital advocate Gustilo wondered whether there’s a trigger for the driver’s phone to stop the recording, too. “Pa’no mare-recognize yung device ni driver or ng device mo? What if you took that call from a different device other than what you are using for Grab?” he said.
(How will your and the driver’s device recognize the call?)
Dela Vega said that only the passenger’s phone with the Grab app recognizes calls and stops recording the ride’s audio. But the driver’s phone will continue recording the trip.
“Your phone will never record your voice and the other person on the line… But the fact that the driver’s phone is still recording, to me, is that we’re keeping the shield up because at the end of the day, it’s gonna get deleted after 10 days,” he explained.
The company promises that recordings, encrypted and stored in users’ and drivers’ devices, are only uploaded to Grab’s system once a safety-related complaint is brought to their attention. If no complaint is made about a specific ride within 10 days, its recording is deleted.
Possible misuse?
Still, users expressed fears about possible misuse of their personal data, breaches that can lead to sale of their data to third parties, and even surveillance. It’s a concern in a country where hacking is rampant and cybersecurity threats against government agencies and private companies are common.
“I know na it’s encrypted data but what happens if it’s hacked? Gaano ba kalakas yung protection nila against hackers? As we know, grabe yung hackers ngayon. Di ba kahit mga government database naha-hack,” Ongkiko said.
(How strong is their protection against hackers? As we know, hackers are intense these days. Even government databases are hacked.)
Dela Vega said that penetration tests were conducted by Grab’s cybersecurity teams to ensure that recordings are safely stored in users’ devices.
“We have no other reason to want you to have the feature enabled other than for your safety and for the driver-partners’ safety. There’s nothing for us to gain other than that,” he assured users.
We have no other reason to want you to have the feature enabled other than for your safety and for the driver-partners’ safety. There’s nothing for us to gain other than that.
ej dela vega, grab philippines’ mobility director
Evidence in disputes
Users said that their worries stem from the lack of transparency about AudioProtect’s rollout and other finer details. Their concerns touch on the deficiencies that NPC discovered in the earlier version of AudioProtect in 2020.
“Grab did not sufficiently identify and assess the risks posed by its data processing systems to the rights and freedoms of data subjects,” read the commission’s CDO.
The NPC noted that while Grab notified users about the new safety feature by email and in-application messaging, it failed to inform them at the time that recordings will be used as evidence in case of disputes.
And while there was an option to withdraw consent from the pilot test of the audio recording, “the mechanism to exercise such right during and after the ride was not spelled out in the GrabChat message,” the NPC said at the time.
“It was also not specified if and how the processing will stop if the passenger withdraws consent during the ride, considering that the tech specs prevent the driver from having any control over the device,” it added.
Grab’s privacy impact assessment (PIA) also did not include controls or measures to secure the personal data collected in case of unauthorized access, destruction, loss and alteration, according to the commission.
The NPC requires companies to submit PIA, an evaluation of the impact of their personal data collection on the privacy of individuals.
AudioProtect yet to be finalized
Grab counsel Medalla said the company has submitted updated PIAs and is working closely with the NPC to “finalize the policy pertaining to AudioProtect.”
For Gustilo, it seems that there exists a “repeated violation” of the users’ data privacy: “Dapat i-enforce yung order… May klarong violation ulit e. They recorded without our consent.”
(The order should be enforced… There’s a clear violation again.)
Drivers could resist a potential AudioProtect stoppage. They embrace the feature, seeing it as their protection against spurious passenger complaints.
“Dahil dito sa Audio Protect, kahit papaano siguro maipagtatanggol natin yung sarili natin kung sakaling hindi tayo gawan ng maganda… Mahirap po kasi na bigla na lang tayo made-deactivate na hindi naman talaga natin ginawa yung kasalanan,” Grab driver Jephone Zepeda told PCIJ.
(With AudioProtect, we can at least defend ourselves if someone mistreats us. It’s hard to get deactivated when you really didn’t commit any wrongdoing.)
“Mas maganda na may AudioProtect. Mataas yung laban mo… Mahirap yung puro reklamo. Matatanggal ka e naghahanapbuhay ka lang,” shared Glenn Alejaga, another Grab driver.
(It’s better to have AudioProtect. Your defense is stronger… It’s hard when there are many complaints. You’re at risk of losing your job when you’re just trying to earn a living.)
After learning more about the feature, users also saw its value. But they expressed hopes that the company would consider tweaks that will make passengers more aware that they are being recorded.
“Grab has the responsibility to make sure that the passengers know about it, parang alarm… na magsu-snooze hanggang talagang i-turn off mo siya completely,” Ongkiko suggested.
(Like an alarm that will snooze until you completely turn it off.)
Mercado wished for AudioProtect to be turned off as a default and for consent to be asked before every trip instead.
Grab assured that it’s always finding a balance between safety and a seamless customer experience. But it’s also open to in-app modifications and opportunities that can educate users better on how their features work.
“It’s new. There might be some misunderstanding around it. But alternately the numbers don’t Iie. It’s working, and it’s good,” Dela Vega said.
He said that since the feature was introduced, in-person incidents have been brought down by 35% and inconclusive findings on disputes have decreased by 25%. “We are able to be more conclusive and resolve incidents, not only faster, but also with more fairness,” the Grab executive said.
Still, app users should always be wary and double check what their applications can access, like their photo gallery, microphone and location, Gustilo said.
“Unwittingly, we sometimes share too much with platforms for our convenience. But it can be exploited, even if companies don’t intend it to be. We have to be on the safer side of things,” he said.
Unwittingly, we sometimes share too much with platforms for our convenience. But it can be exploited, even if companies don’t intend it to be. We have to be on the safer side of things.
ronald gustilo, digital pinoys spokesperson
He also implored government agencies to routinely monitor digital platforms.
“Dapat talaga kasi may regular monitoring and auditing dun sa mga ganyang digital platforms lalo yung mga ride-hailing kasi… minsan nagro-roll out sila ng mga features… na hindi alam ng mga ahensya until may magcomplain,” Gustilo said.
(There should really be regular monitoring and auditing for digital platforms, especially ride-hailing applications because… sometimes they roll out features… unknown to agencies until someone complains.)
Grab planned to launch its in-vehicle video recording feature in the future. It’s one of the company’s data processing systems that the NPC banned in 2020 together with AudioProtect’s earlier version.
“We will still go through the NPC – continue working with them – (and) with the LTFRB (Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board) should we roll out anything in the future,” Dela Vega said.
Before reaching that point, will they be able to first address concerns about the controversial AudioProtect? — PCIJ.org