FTC Ends Probe of Google StreetView Privacy Breach

GovTechGuy writes "The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wrote to Google on Wednesday to end its probe into a major privacy breach in which the company collected and stored private user information, such as passwords and entire e-mails, without even realizing it after the search giant promised to improve its privacy practices."

Comments

I'm sure that...

[Bill_the_Engineer]

I'm sure that Eric Schmidt being Barrack Obama's "informal" technology advisor had nothing to do with it.

Re:I'm sure that...

[Microlith]

I know, it couldn't have anything to do that nothing transmitted in the clear over unregulated frequencies is considered secret in any way, and therefore Google arguably did nothing wrong whatsoever.

It had to be political gaming by CEOs to protect them from Federal legal action for violating... what law again?

Re:I'm sure that...

[LordLucless]

This is how low Slashdot has sunk. Years ago, this site was very pro-privacy. We're now at the point where a company can archive your emails and passwords, claim it was an accident, and get off the hook by promising not to do it again next time--and that's "doing nothing wrong whatsoever" according to the posters here.

No, we're just very pro personal responsibility. If you're broadcasting unencrypted data into the street, reading it shouldn't be a crime. If you don't know how to encrypt your wireless data - even with easily-cracked encryptions, that at least require some deliberate effort to crack - then you shouldn't it be broadcasting it into people's face. If Google were getting this data by cracking WEP, or performing MitM attacks, then I'm sure you'd see people up in arms.

Complaining about this is like complaining that a vehicle equipped with an audio recorder picked up your shouted argument from the street. If you weren't screaming at the top of your damn lungs, nobody would have heard anything.

Re:I'm sure that...

[wolrahnaes]

Or that there's no reason for a probe to ever have been started. They gathered data from open radio transmitters. There is absolutely ZERO privacy expectation for anything transmitted on open protocols in the clear, so I say tough shit to anyone whose "private" data was captured.

If I strap a tape deck to my radio scanner and drive around recording whatever comes across am I violating the privacy of people who I pick up? Hell no. So why is it such a big deal for Google to do exactly the same with digital data rather than analog voice?

It's already been stated that the reason the data was captured is that Google chose to do things "The Unix Way" and basically strap together a few common apps in their cars, including a packet capture tool. This makes sense since Wireshark (and assumedly all other software that relies on libpcap) can record signal strength with every packet received. Run that constantly and have something logging your GPS position regularly enough, then you can just feed the data in to a processing tool after the fact to go through and create a rough map of what WiFi BSSIDs are where (which is exactly what the data was gathered for, iPhones and Android phones among others can use the WiFi devices they see to get their location).

There's no logical reason they should even have to change what they're doing, but since the majority of the world seems to not understand that they may as well be yelling their personal data in to a CB mic if they send it over unencrypted WiFi, they're changing their toolset anyways to please the public. As such, since there wasn't a problem in the first place and the activity people bitch about is stopping, there's no reason the FTC needs to do a damn thing. There are plenty of other real problems out there for them to deal with.

Re:Still being Sued by Canada

[FooAtWFU]

If suing Google after they collected the passwords you transmitted unencrypted over wireless networks is *really* your idea of "privacy" . . . you're going to be in a big surprise when someone less friendly than Google does the same thing.

They didn't *get caught*

[DrYak]

Gee, we got caught; better do it differently next time.

Well, the fact is, Google discovered the abnormal storage themselves. And reported it immediately.
Storing that data was not their intention, only making a map of SSIDs.

It's not like they where planning to keep this data and profit by re-selling it to marketeers (FaceBook, I'm looking at you !)

I stay with my belief :
- The clueless users who don't secure their network are the problem.
- Even if Google did got punished, this won't suddenly make the clueless users less vulnerable to anyone with bad intentions.
- And, if the next recording guy is a bad guy, it's very unlikely that he'll report himself. He'll just run away unnoticed with the data, and try to sell it.

Re:Whoops!

[Anonymous Psychopath]

No penalty because there's no outcry. People give Google a pass because Google gives them free email, a free search engine, and a free browser. It doesn't seem to occur to Google's fans that their search and advertising platforms are as closed source and proprietary as Windows, and that all the free services only exist to get people's personal data indexed.

I'm pro-privacy, but this is silly. It's no secret that you pay for Google services by allowing them to target advertising at you. That's their business model and not only do they not make any attempt whatsoever to hide it, they point it out every time they have an earnings call.

I fail to see why those shouting their secrets from a street corner have an expectation of privacy. We are responsible for our own privacy, not Google and not the government.