The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Google to pay laughably minuscule fine over Wi-Fi slurp across US

Quick rummage down back of sofa for $7 meeellion

Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery

Google has reached a peanut-sized $7m settlement with 38 US states, after its controversial Street View prowl cars deliberately collected payload data including emails and passwords from unencrypted Wi-Fi networks across America.

The company said in a statement that it was pleased to have inked an agreement with Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen, who led an eight-state executive committee probe into the way Google's cars intercepted sensitive data around the globe.

Jepsen claimed that the $7m figure was "significant", before adding:

Consumers have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This agreement recognises those rights and ensures that Google will not use similar tactics in the future to collect personal information without permission from unsuspecting consumers.

Google had previously coughed to wrongdoing but declined to name the engineer supposedly responsible for the wireless data slurping that happened in many countries around the world and went unchecked for several years.

The mysterious "Engineer Doe" at the heart of the affair was later revealed to be YouTube coder Marius Milner.

Google said in an official statement regarding the $7m fine:

We work hard to get privacy right at Google. But in this case we didn't, which is why we quickly tightened up our systems to address the issue. The project leaders never wanted this data, and didn't use it or even look at it.

In April last year, Google claimed to the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that protecting the identity of the engineer responsible for the Street View data slurp had no consequences for the watchdog's investigation.

That probe ended with the FCC fining Google $25,000 for impeding its inquiry and concluded that some execs at Mountain View must have known about the data slurp.

Because the data scooped up by Street View had been unencrypted, the Commission ruled at the time that Google's actions could not be considered illegal under the US Wiretap Act. Instead the company received only a paltry financial penalty for hampering the Feds' 18-month-long investigation.

Under the multi-state agreement Google signed with Jepsen on Tuesday, the company is required - among other things - to undertake a comprehensive employee education scheme about user data privacy and confidentiality. It is also expected to "eventually destroy" the data its Street View fleet of cars hoovered up "between 2008 and March 2010".

There has been a worldwide outcry against Google's wireless packet hoarding, but so far the complaints are yet to result in any fines or penalties which might actually bother the vast advertising operation. France, for example, slapped a €100,000 penalty on the company.

Here in the UK, the Information Commissioner's Office re-opened its own investigation of Google's Street View tech in June 2012 after the FCC concluded that it seemed "likely that such information was deliberately captured" by the prowling surveillance cars. ®

Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery

Anonymous Coward

Re: Consumers have a reasonable expectation of privacy

I take MASSIVE exception to point 1...

"1) It was a unintentional error that ONLY affected unprotected hotspots"

So...

someone *unintentionally* wrote the code to capture this info,

and then *unintentionally* persisted it somewhere,

and assuming it was a db then this db *unintentionally* had an appropriately designed table with the required columns needed to store this *unintentionally* data.

This is google we're talking about here, where "do what we want until caught" seems to be the unofficial company motto.

Think of the book scanning debacle, insisting webm is "open" & free when it later turns out it wasn't, and the forthcoming grab-your-popcorn public backlash once the first highly-embarrassing videos captured without consent via Glasses goes viral

Sorry, rant off. I actually quite like Google but I really do wish they'd pack in this whole "we're open and trustworthy" BS.

It doesn't fool the tech crowd, and stories like this make the public more aware of what they saw != what they do.

12
1

Re: Consumers have a reasonable expectation of privacy

"Errm, then they should have switched on their Wifi security then..."

No, that''s not how the law works and if a private individual captures and stores payload data from someone's WiFi, they can expect a criminal prosecution if caught. If you or I are expected to know and comply with the law, how much more a big multinational corporation with many technical experts and lawyers at their disposal?

Google's "unintentional" defence was blown out of the water by the fact that they only stored unencrypted payload data - so, the application bothered to check for encryption, discarded that which was not useful and stored that which was unencrypted. If the goal was simply to link access point MAC addresses with physical locations, they need not have stored any payload data whatsoever.

10
2

Re: Consumers have a reasonable expectation of privacy

Let's have a look at some of your FACTS shall we?

Errm, then they should have switched on their Wifi security then...

Yes they should, but hey, not everybody is as uber intelligent as you, clearly. Shock, horror, some people enjoy using the internet and are not technical geniuses. Scratch that, you're a fucking moron for not realising that yourself.

1) It was a unintentional error that ONLY affected unprotected hotspots.

No, it was INTENTIONALLY designed into those cars' software. Whether you believe the company knew or not is another argument but it was put there by an employee of the company, therefore the company is responsible and liable for the actions of that employee.

2) the data was never used, and discarded.

You know this do you? (Tip: you don't) Google were already busted once after they said the data had been deleted yet they'd kept a backup which was uncovered when the right questions were asked.

12
4

More from The Register

 breaking news
UK telcos chuck another £1m at online child abuse watchdog
Web enforcers IWF gain power to seek and destroy illegal content
 breaking news
Pttow! Ofcom kicks hams out of MoD bands
Geet off my land, you, you ... 'secondary user'
 breaking news
Now you can use your phone instead of your wallet at the ATM, too
Blimey, these little paper towels out of the vending machine are really expensive
 breaking news
UK.gov's £530m bumpkin broadband rollout: 'Train crash waiting to happen'
Whitehall whispers of damning watchdog report next month
Google launches broadband balloons, radio astronomy frets
A careless Loon could blind the square kilometre array
 breaking news
MySpace zaps millions of teens' tearful rants, causes wave of angst
'Your crappy redesign SUCKS, I wanna read my blogs' screech users
 breaking news
Microsoft Office 365 on iPhone NOW: No, we're not making this up
Word, Excel, Powerpoint for your pocket-stroker
 breaking news
EU signs off on eCall emergency-phone-in-every-car plan
GPS and a mobe in every car - do you suppose the NSA would fancy that?