Slashdot Mirror
Google Tells Congress It Disclosed Wi-Fi Sniffing
theodp writes "While conceding 'it is clear there should have been greater transparency about the collection of this [Wi-Fi] data,' Google asserted 'we have provided public descriptions of our location-based services' in its written response to Congress (PDF) about whether the public had been adequately informed of its data collection efforts. To prove its point, Google's how-many-times-do-we-have-to-tell-you answer included a link to a blog entry on My Location on the desktop, an odd choice considering that Google is still less-than-clear about exactly what's being captured by the service ('When My Location is active, Toolbar will automatically send local network information (including, but not limited to, visible WiFi access points)'). Congress might also want to evaluate the transparency of this cute Google video, which assured the public of Street View's privacy safeguards, but gave no hint of the controversial Wi-Fi collection."
Their mode of operation has been to collect all the raw data they could and pass it to the smart guys in the back room to develop applications.
The problem is that this time they did it driving (and cycling) down peoples streets and occasionally in their driveways. From their perspective its a simple misunderstanding and I expect a truce will be agreed on.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
To obtain your location, Google Maps takes advantage of the W3C Geolocation API
That article explains EXACTLY what it does and what information is gathered. And it appears (though I might be wrong) that WiFi data is used to discern location, but not always necessarily passed to a site using My Location. It also looks like the Geolocation spec ISNT authored by google, but by the W3C. But of course its not quite as fun to call "witchcraft" on the W3C, now is it?
You know, I keep holding out hope that people on slashdot will tend to read the articles they post before posting it, but maybe Im just being naieve.
This is not "shady." I operate an open wifi hub myself and I live in town. One neighbor is almost always connected via his iphone. What neighbor? I haven't a clue - that's the whole point of providing anonymous and free bandwidth to my community. I hope that person is using it to save money on their phone bill cuz, as a homeowner, the better off my neighbor is the better off I am.
People are not idiots. When it is called "wifi" and "wireless" and you can network comupters without wires, anyone who understands technology of the last century knows it's using radio. They may choose to remain ignorant to the details, but it's simple common sense that when I am using "radio" others can hear shit I say unless I do something about it. The government and the media powerhouses have done their part in making the public scared enough of this technology that most now attempt to lock them down using wep, again demonstrating that most have a basic understanding of the technology.
Making shit public and then bitching about someone for using the information YOU CHOSE TO MAKE PUBLIC is a synthetic dismissal of responsibility (or...ummmm.. just a lie). The only thing Google is guilty of here is having enough money and resources to gather this data on a larger scale than I and my neighbor are capable of.
I have one question, though: exactly how much privacy do people expect, given that what Google collected was what those people were broadcasting in the clear to the world at large? It's the equivalent of Google listening to what people are saying sitting at the corner coffee shop. Face it, when you're talking in public with strangers standing right next to you listening, you don't expect what you say to go unheard. So, why do you expect what you're broadcasting with the moral equivalent of a bullhorn to remain private? You want it private? Either don't broadcast it at all or at least encrypt it before broadcasting it.
Oh, you say the average person doesn't know better? Sorry, they should know better, and if they don't they should know better than to try without getting expert help. No excuses. This isn't rocket science. We've had personal computers for over 30 years. We carry sophisticated ones in our pockets and use them to make phone calls. It's well past high time the average person was expected to have a basic understanding of what they're so casually carrying around and using every day, and past time we stopped making excuses for the ones who just can't be bothered. You shouldn't need to know the details of how encryption works in 802.11*, but you should at least know as much as "I need encryption turned on, and if I don't know where and how to turn it on I need to either RTFM or ask someone who does know for help.".
More important than asking why Google collected this information is asking why people were so negligently reckless as to broadcast anything sensitive in the clear in the first place.
No, it's not good for all concerned.
Here in Australia, Google officials are trying to claim that they didn't know the data was being collected because it was being collected accidentally. Over there they're claiming "we knew, and we told you we were doing it."
Well, which is it?
I hate printers.
Finally, Google managed what we tried to get going with http://www.nodedb.com/index.php ... ten years later.
No, because writing the spec doesn't affect anybody's privacy, implementing it does. The fact that Apple and others are implementing the spec tells you that there is broad agreement that this is useful.
Besides, this is nothing new: applications, phone companies, and governments have been able to determine your location from your cell phone for years now. The fact that Google does it too now, and that it becomes accessible to web applications, doesn't make the situation significantly different.
I really hope no one tells Congress about WiGLE.
It's a broadcast signal for crying out loud!! What really is the big deal? It's broadcast for the whole world to see! If a person drives down my street and has their laptop looking for WiFi they will see mine and 20+ others on my street, most secured. So what is the big deal? Sounds like the congress has found a thin opportunity to stick it's nose in to google's business and is taking full advantage of doing so, even if they are over stepping their boundaries and trying to obtain info that they did little leg work on. Info that they have very little to no legitimate reasons to have or need.
People are not idiots.
You sure about that?
If they had a big sign on their street view vans that said "All your data are belong to us", that would be good enough for everyone currently complaining? I doubt it. So why would it be good enough if they post something anywhere on their websites that says the same thing? It's not like people are agreeing to some terms-of-service with Google when they buy their house!
So Theodp continues his one-man crusade against Google, and Slashdot inexplicably continues to aid him by posting his troll article summaries. This is at least his 3rd one on this particular Google issue alone and there haven't even new developments.
Let's review:
WHEN YOU USE GOOGLE LOCATION SERVICES, THEY KNOW WHERE YOU ARE. Shocking!:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/06/01/1217220
This one's summary is so ridiculously inaccurate and biased I can't do it justice by summarizing it myself:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/05/29/0818219
The germans wanted to do something, but failed. Lets argue about Google some more:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/06/04/1839230
Here's some other Google posts he's made that are only slightly less ridiculous:
Google is hacking your box:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/06/11/0143255
Google Lied about Apps being a successful product:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/09/07/1218227/Google-Apps-Not-the-DC-Success-Many-Believe?from=rss
Google is racist:
http://search.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/26/0311249
Ok, man, we get it. You think Google is evil and you wear a tinfoil hat to keep them from packet sniffing your brain because they can *totally* do that. Whatever. The rest of us are sick of hearing about it. Most of us here understand the issue better than you apparently do and we aren't nearly as concerned.
It's clear you have a bone to pick, especially with the whole wifi thing which I'm not sure you really understand -- but FFS, why is Slashdot still posting these things? I swear this is the 4th time you've rehashed the whole wifi thing with a slightly different spin and managed to get it posted yet again. Each time you avoid facts in favor of frantic hand-waving and put words in Google's mouth like "how-many-times-do-we-have-to-tell-you" and "After mistakenly saying that it did not collect Wi-Fi payload data". Please, for the love of god. Just stop.
People are getting upset that someone recorded wireless transmissions? Come on, it's radio, once you broadcast it's there for the whole world to pick up. Encryption can slow down someone reading your traffic, but that's only a speed bump. There is no expectation of privacy on a radio broadcast, if you think your wi-fi network is secure, you're only showing the world that you don't understand the technology.
Compare this to the Bush/Cheney Regime program to record network and phone traffic. Where's the outrage and investigation of King George? The current king has quietly continued this program. I have more trust in Google than I do the the United States government.
One more time, if you broadcast it, it's available for anyone to intercept.
They knew it was not legal to play man in the middle with other peoples networks.
Passively capturing packets is not a Man-in-the-middle attack.