People in Connecticut can see what was snatched by Google in the wi-fi capture affair - why can't we?

Harlow's hard-hitting Rob Halfon MP has blogged excellently over at his site (which BBW recommends): the Connecticut Attorney-General has demanded sight of what Google captured in his patch, so as best to represent the interests of the victims concerned.

Good enough for them - why not for us in the UK?

By Alex Deane

Comments

[alastair]

How does this enhance privacy?

If, for instance, I foolishly transmitted a password in plaintext over an unencrypted WiFi link, and Google had captured that, *HOW* does letting someone look at it enhance my privacy?

None of the privacy organisations, BBW included, have satisfactorily answered that question.

Deleting the data without looking at it, on the other hand, seems a manifest improvement to the situation - prior to deletion, there is a risk that someone will see my unencrypted password. Afterwards (assuming deletion is done properly), there is no such risk. That is an enhancement to my privacy.

[Alex Deane]

It assists privacy in this way.

Google denied capturing "any meaningful personal material." If the data had then been deleted (as you were calling for, Alastair, along with Google) then we would never have known otherwise.

However, now even Google admits that this was not true. They admit to having captured whole e-mail addresses, IP addresses, passwords, etcetera.

Now, Alastair - what ELSE has Google captured? In Connecticut, they're going to find out. On the other hand, given the ICO's response, which you agree with, the data will be deleted in our patch, and you and I will have to take Google's word for what was taken here.

Why would one do so, given the manifest untruthfulness of their position in the earlier stages of the process?

[Kev]

It will also help to know what you have to do to "fix" any problems the slurped data may hold.

If you can see it was just credentials to a particular site that were logged then you know what needs to be changed to stop anybody else from accessing your account on that site.

If you didn't know you might be unaware that somebody else could have seen your details.

How would data to be presented? I'm guessing they'd have to match MAC addresses to data and only let you see what came from your corresponding MAC.

[PJH]

People are complaining that the stuff they spew out over wifi in plaintext such that any passer-by (e.g. google) can sniff?

Regulating (or not) the likes of Google isn't the problem here people.

As, in most IT problems, the problem is people. Educate them. If your wifi is sending out data that Google can pick up on a general drive past your house, WTF is your friendly neighbourhood hacker doing with your data?