Export thread

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/22/google_streetview_logs_wlans/

Google's roving Street View spycam may blur your face, but it's got your number. The Street View service is under fire in Germany for scanning private WLAN networks, and recording users' unique Mac (Media Access Control) addresses, as the car trundles along.

Germany's Federal Commissioner for Data Protection Peter Schaar says he's \"horrified\" by the discovery.

\"I am appalled… I call upon Google to delete previously unlawfully collected personal data on the wireless network immediately and stop the rides for Street View,\" according to German broadcaster ARD.

Spooks have long desired the ability to cross reference the Mac address of a user's connection with their real identity and virtual identity, such as their Gmail or Facebook account.

Other companies have logged broadcasting WLAN networks and published the information. By contrast Google has not published the WLAN map, or Street View in Germany; Google hopes to launch the service by the end of the year.

But Google's uniquely cavalier approach to privacy, and its potential ability to cross reference the information raises additional concerns. Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently said internet users shouldn't worry about privacy unless they have something to hide. And when there's nowhere left to hide...?

Click to expand...

I'm seriously rethinking having all my email in Gmail anymore.. I sure love Google Earth but I don't feel I can trust Google anymore..

*shrugs* I'm unsurprised. Google's mission statement is, "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." This is exactly that.

So... I can go into his house anytime I want and go through his stuff all I want and he should have no problem with it... unless he has something to hide.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently said internet users shouldn't worry about privacy unless they have something to hide.

Click to expand...

I hate it when people say that. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

This isn't like going into someone's house. That would imply breaking the law, unlawful entry, etc. This is data that's broadcast to anyone in the street.

except I don't broadcast my machine's addresses. The fact that they are RELEASING that information is in my book, a major breach of privacy!

If you're not broadcasting it, they didn't pick it up and therefore cannot publish it. While I get the privacy concerns, this is just info you're already throwing out on the street anyway. Don't want to be a part of it, stop throwing your info out. Seems simple and easy enough.

well first off my networks are privately locked. That means they have to have a key. To then get in (unless I misunderstand how wifi works, which I admit I am not an expert in) would require knowing the key which I don't give out, or them hacking in, which in the latter is a criminal offense. To then publish private data is also, in my understanding, also a criminal offense.

Matt² said:

well first off my networks are privately locked. That means they have to have a key. To then get in (unless I misunderstand how wifi works, which I admit I am not an expert in) would require knowing the key which I don't give out, or them hacking in, which in the latter is a criminal offense. To then publish private data is also, in my understanding, also a criminal offense.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure no one said that google was hacking private networks and publishing that information. So, what are you up in arms about again?

guess I'm right on time.

When they say "users' unique MAC address" are they just talking about the router MAC address or MAC addresses of the users on the network? 'Cause the latter seems a bit unlikely unless the network is totally unsecured.

Can you actually find that out if the network is encrypted and you don't have the passkey?

Also, Matt, I'm royally confused about this hacking angle you've come up with. All Google seems to be doing is mapping WLANs. Is this another article you're talking about?

Perhaps I am misinformed or just freaking out a little about a lack of privacy .. I don't know if, when they're referring to

...scanning private WLAN networks, and recording users' unique Mac (Media Access Control) addresses, as the car trundles along....

Click to expand...

as being from public (unsecured) or private (secured) routers and access points. If public then ok, fine it should be locked down..and [analogy]if you're blaring a radio in the street you can't get mad at someone else listening.[/analogy] Fine, I get that.

BUT if they're somehow accessing PRIVATE routers and access points (which I may have freaked out and said "hacking"...had I had my coffee yet?) and publishing THAT data, then yes, I have a big problem with that.

I don't think any article on this subject has said that Google is hacking networks. That'd be an awfully time-consuming thing to do while they're just cruising along taking photos. It makes no sense.

On the other hand, if you broadcast your MAC out to the neighborhood, you can't really bitch if someone writes it down.

Here's some more on it: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/google-talks-street-view-wifi-collection-details.ars

In a blog post Tuesday, Google's Global Privacy Counsel Peter Fleischer explained that Google's Street View cars gather information in three categories: photos of the street, WiFi network information, and 3D building imagery. Google maintains that all this information is public and that numerous other services catalog the same information—in some cases, for much longer than Google.

Click to expand...

Google insists that it only collects SSID and MAC information on routers that broadcast the names publicly, as that information is accessible by anyone walking down the street with a WiFi-compatible device.

Click to expand...

The Register is up in arms about something that's been done by companies for nearly a decade now, only it's suddenly important because Google is doing it? Say it ain't so!

Seriously. All they're doing is collecting publicly available wifi information - the SSID and MAC of the wifi access points as they trundle around. Companies have been doing this for years and geotagging them so that wifi devices can figure out where they are without GPS. Google was, until recently, using some other company's database for this information, but they now have their own database that says, "If you can see this router, then you are probably in Austin, Texas near Main street and River street." They collect the MAC because the SSID can change (so, too, the MAC, but not as easily).

I love the line about how the spooks would love to have this information so they can match people with their MAC addresses. The MAC address is not transmitted over the internet, so you can have all the MAC addresses of all your own citizens and you aren't going to know anything new or interesting about them, unless you join their LAN.

The article is just another bunch of hogwash intended to sell papers/webviews. Yes, there's truth there, and it is somewhat interesting, but it's of no real importance or significance.

Having a wifi access point in your house is like conducting all your conversations by yelling. A neighbor next door or traveler outside may listen in all they want, and identify you by voice. You can yel in code, in which case they won't be able to tell what you're saying, but they can still characterize your voice and identify it as the same voice later on.

If you don't want people to listen in on your conversations, don't shout (ie, don't use wifi, or make sure the radio transmission never leaves your property using a Faraday cage). Alternately, speak in code (ie, use WPA2) and realize that people may still be able to walk by later and say, "yep, same person that was shouting there last week - I must be close to my destination."

This is the technological equivalent of someone taking a photo of you walking in front of your front open window naked. Yeah, you might THINK you're in private, but you're just putting out there to be seen. *wry grin*