X’s Location Feature Exposes a Real Problem, but Does Not Fix It – The Cipher Brief

Breaking: X Introduces Location Transparency Feature As US Counter-disinformation Capacity shrinks

In a move aiming to illuminate the origins of online voices, a new feature on X now lists the country from which an account appears to operate and the platform used to access the service. The update, rolled out late last month, appears in the “About this account” section and highlights whether a user signs in via a web browser or a region-specific app store.

Early analyses show several high‑profile accounts pushing political content aligned with MAGA views appear to originate from regions in eastern Europe,Africa,and Southeast Asia.separately, a profile presenting itself as American was flagged as connected through the Nigeria App Store, sparking questions about how such data is interpreted and used.

Experts say the move could curb some foreign influence operations by exposing geographic footprints. Yet they caution that country of origin is not a definitive indicator of who directs, funds, or controls an account, and that sophisticated operators can mask locations with tools like VPNs or proxies.

Over the past decade, the United States has faced multiple campaigns from Russia, China, and Iran to influence American voters and public opinion online.Notable episodes include misrepresented environmental activists in Texas in 2022, Iran posing as political groups during elections, and long-running Russian online campaigns that spread disinformation about various topics, including public safety and industry events.

Viewed through this lens,the new transparency feature marks a step toward greater openness. Still, attribution-identifying who truly operates an account-requires broader investigation, blending regional knowledge with technical forensics.

What the data can and cannot tell us

The added data points can reveal patterns and potential foreign influence operations, but they do not automatically reveal the entity behind the account.Location data can be spoofed,and legitimate users frequently travel or use multiple access points that mix borders and devices.

Operational context: government capacity in flux

Transparency tools emerge as a partial remedy at a time when government capabilities to counter online influence operations are under strain. In recent years, U.S. agencies once dedicated to countering foreign malign influence have seen notable restructuring, complicating coordination and enforcement efforts across agencies and platforms.

Key data at a glance

Aspect	Description	limitations
Origin country	Country where the account appears registered or tied to activity	Can be spoofed; not a standalone indicator of control or funding
Access method	Platform used to sign in (web app, mobile app store, etc.)	Does not reveal ownership or operational command
Notable patterns	Some accounts linked to politically charged content show non-domestic origins	Requires corroborating evidence for attribution
Ancient context	Past cases show adversaries using proxies or networks in multiple regions	Origin data alone cannot identify state or non-state actors

Evergreen insights for readers

Origin transparency can enhance situational awareness for voters and researchers, but it should be one element in a broader toolkit.Effective attribution blends open-source clues with targeted investigations,often involving regional expertise and technical analysis.

Platforms, researchers, and non‑profits play pivotal roles in exposing disinformation landscapes. Governments retain a unique authority to issue subpoenas, access sensitive sources, and impose sanctions or indictments when warranted. Strengthening these capabilities remains a priority for national security and public trust.

As influence operations evolve, so too must methods for detecting and countering them. Transparency tools will need ongoing refinement to keep pace with increasingly sophisticated spoofing techniques and the use of proxy networks across borders.

What this means for the public

For daily readers, the new feature offers a clearer window into where certain online voices might potentially be rooted. It does not replace the need for critical evaluation of facts,cross‑checking sources,and recognizing that online influence campaigns often rely on coordinated inauthentic behavior across multiple platforms.

Reader questions

How useful is country-of-origin data in assessing online influence campaigns-enough to shape your trust in a given account? Do transparency tools justify expanding regulatory or platform-based disclosures to improve accountability?

Bottom line

Location transparency marks a notable shift toward greater openness in online discourse. It highlights foreign influence as a continuing challenge and underscores the need for robust, multi‑layered responses from platforms, researchers, and policymakers alike.

Share your perspective: Do you think location data changes how you evaluate online content? What additional steps would strengthen defenses against foreign influence operations?

Visibility‑only approach – X merely shows a “Location hidden” label when a user toggles the setting, but the underlying metadata remains on X’s servers and can be accessed via API calls.

X’s Location Feature Exposes a Real Problem, but Does Not Fix It – The Cipher Brief

The Core Issue: Unintended Geolocation Leakage

• Automatic tagging: X automatically attaches a coarse GPS coordinate to every post that includes a “check‑in” or location sticker, even when users think the data is hidden.
• Metadata exposure: The underlying EXIF metadata in uploaded images often retains precise latitude/longitude values, which X’s platform parses and displays in the public feed.
• Privacy gap: Researchers at the university of Washington showed that 73 % of X posts with images contain recoverable location data, despite platform warnings (UW 2024).

Why X’s Current Solution Falls Short

1. Visibility‑only approach – X merely shows a “Location hidden” label when a user toggles the setting,but the underlying metadata remains on X’s servers and can be accessed via API calls.
2. No default sanitization – Unlike Instagram, which strips GPS data unless explicitly enabled, X leaves original files untouched.
3. Limited user control – The platform provides a single “remove location” button on the post‑edit screen, but it does not retroactively scrub data from previously shared content.

Real‑World consequences

• targeted harassment: Activists in Hong Kong reported that the location tag on their X posts enabled authorities to pinpoint protest sites within minutes (Human Rights Watch, 2025).
• Commercial exploitation: Advertisers leverage the exposed coordinates to serve hyper‑local ads, often without explicit consent, violating GDPR “purpose limitation” principles.
• Corporate espionage: A 2024 Bloomberg examination revealed that rival firms harvested location‑tagged X posts to map competitor shipping routes, compromising supply‑chain confidentiality.

Regulatory Landscape

Region	Relevant Law	Impact on X’s Location Feature
EU	GDPR (Article 5)	Requires “data minimisation”; X’s retention of raw GPS data may be non‑compliant.
US (California)	CCPA	Consumers have the right to request deletion of location data; X’s lack of bulk‑delete tools hinders compliance.
India	Personal Data Protection Bill (PDPB)	Mandates explicit user consent for location processing; X’s “opt‑out” model could be deemed insufficient.

practical Tips for Users

• Strip EXIF data before uploading – Use free tools like ExifTool or mobile apps that remove GPS tags.
• Review privacy settings regularly – Navigate to Settings → Privacy & Safety → Location and disable “Add location to posts” and “Show location in profile.”
• Use VPN and browser extensions – Tools such as Privacy Badger block X’s API calls that fetch location metadata.
• Audit old posts – Batch‑edit using X’s API (requires developer access) to run a script that removes the geo field from all historic tweets.

Sample PowerShell script (for advanced users)

# Replace YOUR_BEARER_TOKEN with your developer token


$headers = @{ Authorization = "Bearer YOUR_BEARER_TOKEN" }





# Fetch recent tweets with location data


$tweets = Invoke-RestMethod -Uri "https://api.x.com/2/tweets/search/recent?query=has:geo" -Headers $headers





foreach ($tweet in $tweets.data) {


    $payload = @{ geo = $null } | ConvertTo-Json


    Invoke-RestMethod -Method PATCH -Uri "https://api.x.com/2/tweets/$($tweet.id)" -Headers $headers -Body $payload


}

Note: Always test scripts on a small sample first.

Benefits of Proper Location Management

• Enhanced personal safety: Removing precise coordinates reduces the risk of stalking and physical threats.
• Compliance assurance: Proactively scrubbing location data aligns with GDPR, CCPA, and upcoming PDPB requirements, lowering legal exposure.
• Brand reputation: Companies that demonstrate diligent location privacy gain consumer trust and avoid negative press.

Case Study: the New York times’ “Location‑Free” Campaign (2024)

• The editorial team adopted a policy to auto‑scrub all geotags from photos before publishing on X.
• Result: A 38 % drop in location‑related user complaints within three months and a measurable increase in follower engagement (NYT Analytics, Q3 2024).
• Key takeaway: Systematic metadata removal can be scaled across large newsrooms without sacrificing content quality.

Technical Recommendations for X (Product Team)

1. Implement server‑side EXIF stripping – Apply a default “strip‑gps” filter to all media uploads, with an opt‑in toggle for users who deliberately want to share precise location.
2. Expose a bulk‑delete endpoint – Allow users to request removal of all location data tied to their account in a single API call, satisfying CCPA “right to delete.”
3. Add obvious logs – Provide a dashboard that lists every instance where location data was collected and how it was used, reinforcing GDPR “accountability.”
4. Offer “location‑blur” feature – Instead of a binary hide/show, let users blur coordinates to a city‑level radius, balancing usability with privacy.

swift Checklist for Auditing X’s Location Feature

• Verify that EXIF data is removed on upload.
• Confirm no residual geo fields remain in API responses for public posts.
• Ensure user‑initiated deletion triggers a complete purge from backups after 30 days.
• Review third‑party analytics contracts for compliance with data minimisation.

---

All data points referenced are drawn from publicly available reports, academic studies, and regulatory texts up to December 2025.