Privacy Group Calls Google Latitude a Real 'Danger'

CWmike writes "Privacy International is calling Google's new mapping application an 'unnecessary danger' to users' security and privacy. The criticism follows the unveiling this week of Google Latitude, an upgrade to Google Maps that allows people to track the exact location of friends or family through their mobile devices. Google Latitude not only shows the location of friends, but it can also be used to contact them via SMS, Google Talk or Gmail. 'Many people will see Latitude as a cool product, but the reality is that Google has yet again failed to deliver strong privacy and security,' said Simon Davies, director of London-based Privacy International, in a statement. The group's chief concern is that Google Latitude lacks sufficient safeguards to keep someone from surreptitiously opting into the tracking feature on someone else's device."

Re:Frightening

[JorDan Clock]

This is exactly how it works: You install software on your phone. If you have physical access to someone's phone long enough to install the software, I think there are other far more malicious things you could do, like copy contacts and such.

Re:Tell me again

[QuantumRiff]

I played with it on my blackberry, its pretty cool. When I quit the Map App, it asks if I want to keep tracking on, or disable it. Also, you have to give people permission to see your location. I can't help but think of some handy uses for it, such as your meeting friends at the game, and don't know where in the crowded parking lot they are, or what bar their sitting in downtown, and your trying to join them. It would be a hell of alot faster than trying to talk someone all the way to my location.

Re:Everyone focuses on the negative

[mweather]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/22/AR2007112201444_pf.html [washingtonpost.com]

Re:Everyone focuses on the negative

[Lumpy]

Exactly. My wife and I and our friends use latitude. it's really easy to control your location.

Also by default it does not use the gps so it's always about 2500 feet off from where you really are.

Privacy international is simply trolling.

Re:Well then, don't use the app!

[TooMuchToDo]

One of the cool features is that I can set my location manually. So if I want to tell someone I'm somewhere, but be somewhere else, it's entirely possible.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Everyone focuses on the negative

[brandorf]

You missed the point entirely: someone else opts you in using your own phone without you knowing it. Think about that for a second. Ever leave your phone sitting out somewhere? "Simply not using Latitude" isn't an option if someone opts you in without knowing. Got it?

If I was concerned about people snooping around on my phone, I would set it to lock, so it requites a password if you want to fuss with it. Pretty much all phones can do that.

Re:Everyone focuses on the negative

[poptix_work]

| The only way that could work is if Google have mapped the physical location of every WiFi network and are using them to do the locating. I knew that was theoretically possible, but I didn't know Google had actually done it. For some reason, I found that slightly creepy.

Actually, Google didn't do it. This company did: http://www.loki.com/ [loki.com]

It's pretty interesting and useful. Personally I don't have an issue with a public company doing anything a government can do without you noticing, it brings those things into the light where people can say 'hey, if $company can track my cell phone/laptop via wifi access points, so can the government'. I personally think Google worked *very* hard to ensure that privacy concerns would be avoided with Latitude. When you start Google Maps it mentions latitude, your icon changes significantly, exiting Google Maps asks if you wish to continue sharing your location. You must enable sharing on a per-friend basis when adding them, and the default is NO (even on the selection box). It's also possible to share at different levels of accuracy, AND to set a location to be reported in case you don't want anyone to know you're "hiding".

Re:How does someone make you run Google Maps 24/7?

[aviators99]

Nope. This is what I thought, at first. It actually works even when you're not in the map, just without GPS.
It only can use radio tower location/signal strength when not in the map application. Humorously enough,
the only time it doesn't work is when you are speaking on the phone, and in a non-3G/non-WiFi area
(because it can't transmit your location over the net).

Re:Tell me again

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the fallacy. It may appear so, but surely you understand that any google employee can see it,

As a Google employee, I can state that this is not true at all. An employee only gets access to user data only when it is required to do their job. As a result, most employees don't have access to any private user data at all, because you don't need it -- you don't need to read people's mail to write a mail application. As a corollary, almost nobody at the company has access to more than one product's data.

While it is fine to express any opinion you want on privacy and data retention, please do not pass pure speculation off as facts.

and that a hack will enable unauthorized access from outsiders

You seem pretty confident of this. Aside from GMail, which in it's original form was largely written before the company had proper security reviews of new products, Google has had an excellent track record. Even in GMail, the bugs that have been found have been fixed very quickly after they became public.

So, to be worried about Latitude, I'd have to (1) choose to use the service (2) update it with real data even though a "set location" option is available (3) be hiding from someone, and (4) the stalker would need to be a super-hacker capable of coming up with their own exploit and keep it secret. If in the unlikely case that #3 and #4 are both true for someone, I guess I'd recommend avoiding #2 or #1.

Realistically I worry a lot more about the government or a credit card company leaking my data, since they seem to suffer from the actions of a lot of technically naive employees, and don't appear to be able to limit the scope of where the data gets copied.

Not to mention authorities that may in the future legislate that they must be provided access to your position.

You have the same problem with your mobile phone provider, and telecom companies have already displayed a willingness to work with the government beyond normal legal warrants. If anything, this new feature makes it obvious what your phone company already knows about you, and will allow citizens to make better informed choices on the risk/reward tradeoff this kind of technology gives you.

Re:Everyone focuses on the negative

[Lumpy]

I'm not desensitized. I CONTROL IT. I turn it on and off and CONTROL WHO can see my location.

Now take away that control, I'm writing an app and having it report fake locations to the app. I'll gladly screw with any company and system tracking me without my desire to.

In fact I did that for GPS.. NEMA sentences are very well documented, we screwed with a Truck GPS tracking system making it report the truck in random GPS locations every 30 seconds. The truck was in the atlantic, canada, texas, california, new-mexico, Lake michigan, Ohio, etc.. GPS is incredibly easy to usurp and control, what Google lattitude uses is just as easy to screw with.