Australian Police To Investigate Google Over Wi-Fi Scanning

daria42 writes "Those who thought the brouhaha over Google's scanning of Wi-Fi networks by its Street View cars was over (whether you believe it was deliberate or not) are destined to be disappointed. News comes from Australia over the weekend that the Australian government has referred the matter to the Australian Federal Police for investigation. The country's Attorney General, Robert McClelland, was quoted saying, 'Obviously I won't pre-empt the outcome of that investigation but they relate in substantial part to possible breaches of the Telecommunications Interception Act, which prevents people accessing electronic information other than for authorized purposes.'"

Comments

give it a rest

[v1]

Is this the world's favorite new way to waste time, suing google for recording publicly available information from wifi spots as they drive?

idiots. ALL idiots.

Re:give it a rest

[melikamp]

May be they are using this law in order to get access to all of the collected data.

Re:give it a rest

[lendude]

Exactly right. This is Conroy chucking a hissy fit, attempting a vindictive and conceited payback for Google's accurate commentary re: his pet 'Filter OZ' project, and trying to leverage what remains of his crippled credibility to boost the same. The guy is so adolescent it's laughable. Please Conroy - just fuck off and die: that's seriously the best advice I can offer you.

Re:give it a rest

[williamhb]

Is this the world's favorite new way to waste time, suing google for recording publicly available information from wifi spots as they drive?

I hope they prosecute the pants off them. Suppose it wasn't Google but Microsoft. Would you still be happy for them to be intentionally gathering data (be it records of who has which WiFi device or the actual conversations) just because the electromagnetic fields were leaking through your walls? After all, the heat radiation that escapes through your walls and windows is "publicly available" so surely it'd be ok for them to sit outside with a thermal camera pointed at your house. And the sound radiation that leaks through too -- so there'd be "no problem" with them pointing very sensitive directional microphones towards your bedroom window and recording that too... I mean, it's just your own silly fault for not installing a lead-lined cone of silence over your bed...

No, this is just slashdot giving Google a free pass (Slashdot's Google love-in), even though Google explicitly intended to gather and sell data about you without your permission. Their excuse is "oops, we didn't mean to gather quite that much data" not that they didn't mean to do it at all.

Re:In other news..

[MrNaz]

What, you mean like a fleshy cone like structure surrounding a biological tube at the bottom of which is an organ known as a "cochlear"?

Yea, I hate it when people wear those things. It makes me so nervous.

It's Sad...

[YodaYid]

...that as an American, I'm looking to Europe and Australia to actually stand up to Google and stop them from collecting every bit of data they can about me, like actually sending a van outside my house to grab information about my home network.

Re:It's Sad...

[zuperduperman]

This is what amazes me about this whole incident. Not one official person (other than from Google) has even once mentioned that people should protect their privacy by putting passwords on their Wifi access points.

On the radio just today, Stephen Conroy said that Google may have captured people doing "sensitive banking transactions" as they drove past, as if it would be perfectly safe for them if only Google hadn't driven past and captured the data. Overlooking that all banking transactions are done over https, Conroy was effectively advising people that extremely risky behavior is perfectly OK. There is a level of extreme hypocrisy about the whole debate that leads me to believe this is 100% a witch hunt primarily designed to distract from the government's own desire to violate our privacy.

Re:In other news..

[91degrees]

It's about reasonable expectations. You can reasonably assume that someone nearby has an ear. Maybe even two. You can also reasonably assume that they will be able to hear you if youtalk at normal volume.

You would not normally be listening with an electronic listening and recording device, or a laser microphone (which simply detects publicly visible vibrations), or climbing a tree in a public area purely in order to see you naked in your back yard.

Likewise, you don't expect people to be arbitrarily scanning for wireless data.

If you're a mutant that can, without any additional equipment, detect wi-fi signals, then you shouldn't be prosecuted, but I'm sure that isn't a requirement for being hired by Google.

Re:When will this end?

[Antisyzygy]

Part of being in a public place is that you accept the risk being overheard. The thing about Wi-fi networks is that there are many publicly available networks out there that allow people to use them. How are we to distinguish if its OK to use some of them but not others if people are too lazy to go through the necessary steps to secure their networks? Just by using someones public network you can intercept their communications. Having a public network you broadcast your data over is akin to leaving a basket full of stuff outside with a sign that says "Some things in here are free but Im not telling you what is or isnt, take these items at your own risk". Now, Google admitted that they accidentally kept extra data they should not have, and then promptly agreed to delete all of it. They were not doing what they were doing as a form of surveillance. Its pretty much the same thing as video taping a public place, accidentally taping someone talking about private business and then deleting that portion of the tape once you realize whats on it.

Re:In other news..

[Sabriel]

Likewise, you don't expect people to be arbitrarily scanning for wireless data.

Actually, I do expect people to be arbitrarily scanning for wireless data. ECHELON aside, radio scanners have been publicly available for many years in Australia.