Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Google Businesses Technology

Google Caught Misbehaving By Kenyan Startup 383

Posted by Soulskill
from the hand-in-cookie-jar dept.
An anonymous reader sends in an interesting story from Mocality, a company that painstakingly built a business directory in Kenya. When they discovered that somebody was systematically harvesting the contact information they'd collected (and after a few very odd phone calls from confused Kenyan business owners), they set up a sting to see what was really going on. They swapped out the phone numbers listed for a few businesses with phone numbers in their own call centers, and then waited to see who called. Mocality was shocked to discover it was Google Kenya, who falsely claimed a business collaboration with Mocality, and then lied about Mocality's business practices.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Caught Misbehaving By Kenyan Startup

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Legal ? (Score:5, Informative)

    by antitithenai (2552442) on Friday January 13, @10:35AM (#38685478)
    Yes it is illegal in the US, and FTC should really look into Google's practices. Thankfully that is in the works, as privacy watchdog EPIC has complained to FTC [techcrunch.com] and asked them to look into all of misbehaviors of Google.
  • by antitithenai (2552442) on Friday January 13, @10:36AM (#38685500)
    It's not just some random blog, it's the company blog. But if you want to read it from some other source, here is TechCrunch [techcrunch.com].
  • Re:Real or fake? (Score:5, Informative)

    by antitithenai (2552442) on Friday January 13, @10:42AM (#38685564)
    Yes, because later there is Google Indian call centers calling and visits from Google's net ranges.

    There were no further accesses from the IP address 41.203.221.138 after 4pm 23rd December. Co-incidence? or had someone realised we were onto them?

    However, there were some NEW strange messages from business owners- theyâ(TM)d apparently been contacted by a call centre in India with the same promise of a website.

    NetRange: 74.125.0.0 - 74.125.255.255
    CIDR: 74.125.0.0/16
    OriginAS:
    NetName: GOOGLE

  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:5, Informative)

    by Synkronos (789022) <synkronos AT gmail DOT com> on Friday January 13, @10:50AM (#38685642)
    OrgName: Google Inc.
    OrgId: GOGL
    Address: 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
    City: Mountain View
    StateProv: CA

    That just indicates that the network is registered under Google CA, not that any authorisation for the activity going over that network is. The only thing we can really infer is that the operation is larger than _just_ the Kenyan office, but whether that's some Kenyan dude calling his buddy in India to do him a favour, or the CEO of Google personally masterminding an eeeeeevil takeover of everything, is anybody's guess. Probably somewhere in between.
  • by Tufriast (824996) * on Friday January 13, @10:54AM (#38685688)
    I'd hate to pour some cold water on your hot heads - the man has proof, recorded proof. In addition he has IP logs and tracebacks to Google HQ. He has enough evidence to stand in a court of law and press charges against Google inside of the United States. He's checked with ISPs and double-checked over a period of many months. This is no fake; and this is a huge, huge, blow to Google.
  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:5, Informative)

    by Synkronos (789022) <synkronos AT gmail DOT com> on Friday January 13, @11:01AM (#38685754)
    I'm not defending anything. I merely stated that the mention of Mountain View CA in the whois information is not proof of anything other than the registration being in Google CA's name, rather than what the earlier posted thought it implied.
  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:5, Informative)

    by antitithenai (2552442) on Friday January 13, @11:15AM (#38685950)
    Have you even read the article? It was a huge operation and on some days they manually scraped and called over 2500 businesses. No single employee can do that. And there was also other Google branches involved, like Google India.
  • Ip's can be hijacked (Score:5, Informative)

    by OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) on Friday January 13, @11:22AM (#38686072) Homepage

    IP address ownership, sadly, doesn't prove anything. Anyone with a BGP connection can hijack any IP address for large parts of the world. And before you say "but surely Google can prevent this" :

    Read this [renesys.com]

    I've been the admin on 3 networks which were IP hijacked now. In two cases it was accidental, in a third case it was not. The situation is bad in North America, seriously disappointing in Western Europe, and beyond outrageous everywhere else. Basically, outside of North America and Europe you can pretty much assume anyone can hijack anything they want. Inside "the West" you have to be a carrier, a transit provider with a few hundred customers. Which sounds good, until you realize there's over 500 such organizations in North America alone.

  • by hhw (683423) on Friday January 13, @11:34AM (#38686242) Homepage
    The majority of transit providers use a BGP prefix list to limit what IP addresses you are permitted to advertise to them either through manual management of the list or by using a routing registry, so it's not nearly as common as you're implying. The exception is when it comes to peering, but there aren't that many networks that do a significant amount of peering. And if any of your peers catch you IP hijacking, they're likely to de-peer pretty quickly if they discover you're hijacking IP's. Yes, there are a few transit providers who don't follow this properly (the few instances I recall of IP hijacking usually revolved around Sprint), but it's false to assume that just anyone with a BGP connection can just hijack anyone's IP address.
  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 13, @11:44AM (#38686404)
    When (and I quote the part you left out):

    "The bad press and legal repercussions would outweigh the licensing costs."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 13, @12:05PM (#38686838)

    This is more than a bit unusual for a UA, it's a mismatched spoof.

    For the record, it is a standard Chrome UA. For example, I have:
    Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.75 Safari/535.7

    (I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post)

  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 13, @12:16PM (#38687024)

    Please, stop boasting about your knowledge of the law if you are totally unable to understand it.

    Corporations are legal persons which mean they are seen as a person in their own right and not only as a group of persons.

    What it means is that Google can be guilty of something and by Google, I mean, the legal person that is Google, not Eric Schmidt or the guy who held the phone. So, if someone from Google Kenya knew, Google Kenya knew not necessary its CEO not even talking about the international CEO.

    Where it becomes even more tricky is that Google Kenya and Google corporation are both legal persons with interactions regulated by a contract which means Google Kenya can be guilty and Google not. But, when you think about it for more than two minutes, it perfectly makes sense because after all they are not subject to the same law.

  • Re:Response (Score:5, Informative)

    by Smallpond (221300) on Friday January 13, @12:20PM (#38687086) Homepage Journal

    Yes. The Register [theregister.co.uk] asked them and they said:

    "We're aware that a company in Kenya has accused us of using some of their publicly available customer data without permission. We are investigating the matter and will have more information as soon as possible."

    Note that they are already trying to duck the fraud and focus on the less serious "use of publicly available information" part.

  • by sexconker (1179573) on Friday January 13, @01:23PM (#38688176)

    google wouldnt. but, people employed in google russia, definitely would. bribe or die ? anyone would choose bribe. that does not mean that google ireland is approving it. they end up approving it if they dont take action on it.

    Look, it's unity100 being a moron again.
    "Google" is a corporation - an entity made up of many people, including its employees. When an employee does something wrong, Google does something wrong.
    Something viewed as wrong here doesn't get a pass because it happened somewhere else where that behavior is still wrong but is more common.

    Google's burning villages and eating puppies? Well, it's Africa, I guess that's just their culture.

    Only on slashdot!

  • Re:Do no evil indeed (Score:3, Informative)

    by antitithenai (2552442) on Friday January 13, @02:45PM (#38689484)
    Yes, Google sells domains and sites http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/domain.html [google.com]

    And Google also calls people when they are interested in providing some services to them. What is news about that? I've talked with them over the phone and in email. Of course, you need to do some actual business with Google and not merely use their search engine, but there is nothing new about this.

Minors in Kansas City, Missouri, are not allowed to purchase cap pistols; they may buy shotguns freely, however.

Working...