Google Tells Congress It Disclosed Wi-Fi Sniffing

theodp writes "While conceding 'it is clear there should have been greater transparency about the collection of this [Wi-Fi] data,' Google asserted 'we have provided public descriptions of our location-based services' in its written response to Congress (PDF) about whether the public had been adequately informed of its data collection efforts. To prove its point, Google's how-many-times-do-we-have-to-tell-you answer included a link to a blog entry on My Location on the desktop, an odd choice considering that Google is still less-than-clear about exactly what's being captured by the service ('When My Location is active, Toolbar will automatically send local network information (including, but not limited to, visible WiFi access points)'). Congress might also want to evaluate the transparency of this cute Google video, which assured the public of Street View's privacy safeguards, but gave no hint of the controversial Wi-Fi collection."

The details are clear

[Anonymous Coward]

The article says Google has been "less than clear", but that just for people who don't understand the technology. Exactly what data Google collects, and how they use it, is obvious for anybody who understands the technology. A good explanation of that technology is here:
http://erratasec.blogspot.com/2010/05/technical-details-of-street-view-wifi.html [blogspot.com]

This is just another example of people being scared of "witchcraft". In this case, so many people (even Slashdot readers) don't understand WiFi technology, so the witchhunt is more persistent.

Re:The details are clear

[LordLimecat]

Its better than that, I followed the very first link provided by the poster, then clicked on the link from the third paragraph....

To obtain your location, Google Maps takes advantage of the W3C Geolocation API [w3.org]

That article explains EXACTLY what it does and what information is gathered. And it appears (though I might be wrong) that WiFi data is used to discern location, but not always necessarily passed to a site using My Location. It also looks like the Geolocation spec ISNT authored by google, but by the W3C. But of course its not quite as fun to call "witchcraft" on the W3C, now is it?

You know, I keep holding out hope that people on slashdot will tend to read the articles they post before posting it, but maybe Im just being naieve.

Curse you Google for being successful...

[ritzer]

Finally, Google managed what we tried to get going with http://www.nodedb.com/index.php [nodedb.com] ... ten years later.

WiGLE

[Rijnzael]

I really hope no one tells Congress about WiGLE [wigle.net].

WTF!

[NetNed]

It's a broadcast signal for crying out loud!! What really is the big deal? It's broadcast for the whole world to see! If a person drives down my street and has their laptop looking for WiFi they will see mine and 20+ others on my street, most secured. So what is the big deal? Sounds like the congress has found a thin opportunity to stick it's nose in to google's business and is taking full advantage of doing so, even if they are over stepping their boundaries and trying to obtain info that they did little leg work on. Info that they have very little to no legitimate reasons to have or need.

Re:WTF!

[Rijnzael]

Don't really know why someone modded you flamebait; you're completely right. It's like investigating someone for overhearing a conversation in public and remembering what the parties to the conversation said later on.

Re:THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM

[edjs]

They knew it was not legal to play man in the middle with other peoples networks.

Passively capturing packets is not a Man-in-the-middle attack [wikipedia.org].