Sounds like a sane and sensible decision to me. What's going on?
Google has escaped a fine from the UK Information Commissioner's Office, after the watchdog concluded its investigation into the company's controversial Street View cars that slurped payload data from unencrypted wireless networks. The ICO has ordered Google to destroy all Wi-Fi payload data that its vehicles collected. The …
Because every government entity that could coopt the press forbid the spotted G from touching anything until the greatest amount of PR about 'investigations' and 'scrutiny' and 'protection' and 'concern' could be extracted from a non-governmental goof.
A year it took. Was the emphasis ever on the data, or on the PR that could be gained?
I'd ask this of the continuously fulminating commentards: which really looks worse in this debacle, the public G or the private G?
....Theories anybody? It won't be long now before someone starts posting about how they don't care, and don't see what the fuss is all about. Well its this. The fact that Google deliberately lied about how and why they collected the data s disturbing. They tried to blame it on a lone rogue programmer. But then we learned that there was an entire team assigned to this, and that they wanted the slurp the data for competitive business reasons, the specifics of which are unknown to us....
The fact is that anyone who wants to expend resources on slurping WiFi base station info can, there's nothing stopping them. Just put the right kit in the boot and drive round all the UK's roads for the next millenia and hey presto. In between times folks chuck out kit and the map end up looking moth eaten. Of course it's the principle of the matter that someone like Google has the resources to slurp it, process and then keep us all guessing why? I think we have a lot more to fear about the smart phone in our pockets, out smarting us and allowing uncle Sam, GCHQ and the Missus to know where we are at all times. My neighbour gets all jittery about Google sat view on maps showing his un-planned walled garden and expects the town hall snoops to swoop in any time soon and tell him to go drain is pond. Fact is every tool has both good and evil uses!
I wonder how Google are going to go about proving that the data has actually been deleted?
I'm not for a minute suggesting that they might squirrel it away on a server in the US or whatever - but what form of evidence are they supposed to offer the ICO that proves the deletion? This is data after all, easy to duplicate by its very nature.
You may as well just assume Google has all your data about everything these days.
We were surprised to find the other day that google backs up your WIFI settings to its own cloud, so when you get a new android device it can grab all the passwords automatically.
'course even the ICO uses Google Analytics on its website, almost everything does, so Big G can already correlate pretty much everything you do on the net, whether you use their services directly or not.
"We were surprised to find the other day that google backs up your WIFI settings to its own cloud, so when you get a new android device it can grab all the passwords automatically."
You mean *you* were surprised because you didn't read what you were ticking?
Not sure that I read it either, but I was pleasantly surprised when all my settings and applications were restored after flashing a new ROM on my phone. Yes, I now know where the "Backup my blah blah..." option is, and I know how useful it can be.
The downside to all this, the downside, in fact to Android, is that Everything Is Known To Google.
>> You mean *you* were surprised because you didn't read what you were ticking?
No, I was surprised because it seemed like a security flaw.
I don't know if the individual in question specifically ticked to allow this, but he was surprised when it happened. I personally just think it's a bit much to do automatically. Especially when we're talking about the same company now in trouble over too much wifi sniffing.
Can we not have an automatic Google PRISM-companies translator?
The Information Commissioner said "I've just come from a meeting in Cheltenham, where it was explained to me that (fumbles in pocket for piece of paper...) Google could not possibly have done anything wrong. I would also like to thank the police for helping Google with their enquiries."
Even if it was only one column in a database, you would still have to locate, restore delete and re-backup those old databases. And that's before we consider the possibility that the data might be in key-related tables which need to be present for the database to work ....
There needs to be some ISO standard for what to do in these instances ... maybe *replacing* the data with zeros, or spaces, or whatever is needed ...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022