Slashdot Mirror
Google to Blur Sensitive India Sites
theodp writes "Citing unnamed officials, the Times of India is reporting that Google Earth has agreed to blur and distort Indian locations identified by the government after security concerns were voiced by the country's president. This includes total blurring of locations like government buildings, as well as the outlines/building plans of key facilities. This came about after a recent meeting between Google technicians and Indian officials."
Don't worry, if you live in US at least your face is recorded with hundreds of cameras on daily basic. They can even catch you when you are making love. Err... Wrong site to talk about that last one.
I put trying to modify world geography to make a buck pretty high on my "what counts as evil" scale. That's Bond-villian level there.
I doubt that india is concerned about the CIA - obviously the US government has the capability to take images that are many times the resolution of Google Maps. They are probably concerned about countries that don't have high resolution satellite imagery. Like, say, Pakistan, who has supported Islamic terror groups in attacks against India?
How long it'll be before large numbers of businesses paint advertisments on their roofs and parking lots? The more people use the service the more the planet is likely to start looking like one large web page. It's already happening in a small way but I'm guessing there'll be an explosion of businesses taking advantage of the free advertizing. Then does Google demand they pay up or get blurred?
Wouldn't really make a difference to terrorist militaries (you know, the ones that target clearly-marked Red Cross ambulances and the like).
comma
From TFA: Official sources said Google Earth would distort building plans by adding structures where none existed or masking certain aspects of a facility. This could be done without attracting attention to such establishments, which range from laboratories, mines, military sites, space and atomic centres and residences of high-profile VVIPs.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
So? You're implying that terrorists would use Google Earth? How? The only thing that might be useful to them would be real-time displays of military activity. Years-old photos of sites they'e lived near for years will be of no more than decorative use.
I hate to be mean, but this is in no way insightful. You really think "terrorists" are stupid and uninformed enough to need someone's map censorship to tell them what is important infrastructure? Anyone with the resources to blow up a bridge or an embassy probably already knows what a bridge and embassy are, and where they are. Or do you think someone is going to get on google earth looking for blurs, then load up his truck with explosives and start driving? Rediculous.
I'm amazed that apparently enough people to mod you to a 4 think that the locations of important infrastrucure is somehow particularly "secret," and omg this is a huge exploit!
How stupid do you think terrorrists are?
Relax I just want some peanuts.
Why the HELL was that modded as troll? He has actually a very good point. Wasn't the annihilation of the native americans a terrorist act or not? If you see the world history, 99% of all freedom fighters could be considered terrorists one way or another. 100 years ago practically nobody would blow stuff on citizens, mainly because there was practically no media coverage of the fact (there was practically no media). A line in a newspaper is far from the impact of a video clip.
I know mods are sometimes scared shitless of terrorists, but I can't understand why you have to mod as a troll everyone that states their very measured opinion, even without saying the names of the countries - namely USA and Israel.
The fact that you could so easily understand who he's talking about gives him even more credit, because if we're measured by our actions, so should be countries.
And then he'll rotate the 2D map to give a 3D view of the front of the building. And then zoom in through the window and use the reflection in a mirror to pinpoint the key government official hiding just out of view.
That got modded insightful ? Get real!
"No it doesn't make sense. At a time when the internet provide dozens of different way to get that specific information, be it in several other on-line aerial-photo mapping softwares, or on various other online source,"
I don't buy that. Sure there is a lot of stuff on the internet but super high res satellite photographs of sensitive government installations ? Give me a break. That wont happen until every tom dick and harry gets his own satellite.
There are multiple sources of satellite and aerial photographs, especially when we are talking about public areas like government buildings. Someone already mentioned digitalglobe as a source google themselves might use (and which others use -- it draws on multiple sources apparently itself), and this site lists several different sources for satellite imagery which is available to the public. So yes, there are a lot of toms dicks and harrys out there with satellites. Welcome to the 21st century.
"And besides, it's just security through obscurity, and we all know very well how much that strategy works well."
Your trying to draw a parallel between two completely different fields with different goals and purposes. A government installation is not "open source software" that everyone gets a chance to get a peek see and everyone by and large is benevolent when looking at the source. When you have a country's defense on the line and a lot of baddies want to maim and kill people, obscurity is one of the best weapons. What next ? Show people on the witness relocation program on national television ?
No, the problems and solutions are not at all as disparate as you claim, by your own admission. Government facilities are indeed places where everyone gets a peek and by and large everyone is benevolent looking at the source. If you are talking about less public areas, like military installations, you would be surprised perhaps how much the public is allowed to see. Some military bases are pretty much completely ope to civilian traffic, and those which aren't often have very close perimeters. Even places like Area 51 regularly attract civilians who are able to record an awful lot of information about location of buildings, security measures, and activity. A telephoto lens and/or a telescope or set of binoculars can reveal an awful lot with little chance that the observer will be observed. And those people mostly are not trying to blow the place up.
The argument about security through obscurity is not about the moral question of keeping secrets. It is an indictment based on the fact that any security plan that cannot withstand scrutiny is weaker than one which can. And in this case the attempt to restrict information from one source when there are many others including local surveillance is, besides being a fool's errand in itself, indicative of a fear that the security measures in place will not measure up to an actual attempt. It is also very much in the same vein as the "fig-leaf" faux security that has marked the "war on terror" in general; it is clearly a justified criticism.