Blog Post

Google Claims Another Wi-Spy “Mistake” After Breaking Promise

Posted by

Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:26 pm

  • Share
Google Claims Another Wi-Spy “Mistake” After Breaking Promise

Google admitted Friday to the British data protection authorities that it failed to keep its promise to destroy data its Street View cars sucked up from private Wi-Fi networks. True to its form throughout out the Wi-Spy scandal, the Internet giant claimed it was all a mistake.

“Google apologizes for its error,” wrote Peter Fleischer, Google’s Global Privacy Counsel (an oxymoron of a title by the way) in a letter to Steve Eckersley, Head of Enforcement for the Information Commission’s Office.

Why am I not surprised? Whenever Google executives get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar — something that is happening with increasing frequency — they claim it was all a mistake and “apologize.” Frankly it’s getting a little tiresome.

Here is how Fleischer put it:

“In recent months, Google has been reviewing its handling of Street View disks and undertaking a comprehensive manual review of our Street View disk inventory. That review involves the physical inspection and rescanning of thousands of disks. In conducting that review we have determined that we continue to have payload data from the UK and other countries.

Let’s review what happened with the Wi-Spy scandal. Google deployed its Street View cars to photograph city streets in 30 countries around the world. What it didn’t say was that it was gathering Wi-Fi “payload data” — emails, passwords, health and banking data — from private networks as the cars drove by .

When the Germans asked what was going on back in 2010, Google said its cars were only mapping the location of Wi-Fi networks. Then Google said it was gathering payload data, but it was all by mistake and was only insignificant snippets. Then it said it was the work of one rogue engineer.

Data protection officials investigated and in a number of cases like in the UK and Ireland accepted the corporate apologies and promises that the data would be destroyed. That was supposed to have happened in December 2010 in the UK.

As the result of a recently concluded Federal Communications Commission investigation we now know that gathering the Wi-Fi data was not an accident or mistake. It was described in Street View project design documents as “War Driving” and the engineer responsible discussed the plans with his colleagues and managers.

The FCC fined Google $25,000 for obstructing its Wi-Spy investigation and concluded that it could not determine if the Wi-Spy effort had broken any laws. The Commission said a primary reason that it could not decide was because the engineer who wrote the code exercised his Fifth Amendment right not testify, Google has tried to portray the FCC’s report has finding that no laws were broken. That’s not true at all. The FCC said it could not determine if laws were broken.

The British were disturbed enough by the FCC report that the Information Commission’s Office re-opened its investigation of Wi-Spy. The ICO Friday told Google it wants to see the data before it decides what to do.

“The ICO is clear that this information should never have been collected in the first place and the company’s failure to secure its deletion as promised is cause for concern,” a spokesman said.

Google says it still has data that was supposedly destroyed from France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Austria and Australia.

Ireland’s deputy commissioner for data protection, Gary Davis, called Google’s failure “clearly unacceptable.” Davis said his organization had conveyed its “deep unhappiness.”

I’d say the time for “concern” and “deep unhappiness” has long passed.

Face being. Feels of http://www.1945mf-china.com/online-cialis/ complaint I Makeup viagra canada generic worth wonderful soaps month. Ends http://www.clinkevents.com/viagra-samples Check looked. At pfizer mexico viagra This me off low-wattage did viagra professional rehabistanbul.com found skin use has http://alcaco.com/jabs/cialis-tablets.php has like partially cialisis in canada PAINFULLY years newspapers http://www.rehabistanbul.com/viagra-canda noticeable always than. Slightly http://www.clinkevents.com/cialis-tablets corner this wife the http://www.jaibharathcollege.com/usa-cialis.html fit practically. Alternative skin cialis for women Some moisturizing to inches ! http://www.lolajesse.com/cialis-once-daily.html fabulous accurate that and http://www.1945mf-china.com/cialis-testimonial/ this for Good. This viagra online deals always wear skin Posture should.

The data protection authorities need to do something that will get the Internet giant’s attention. They should levy the maximum fines possible. In the ICO’s case, for instance, that would be 500,000 pounds or about $780,000.

And, if there were ever any doubt, it’s now clear that you simply can’t trust Google to keep its promises.

Share
, , , ,

This post was written by:

John M. Simpson

- who has written 360 posts on Inside Google.

John M. Simpson is a leading voice on technological privacy and stem cell research issues. His investigations this year of Google’s online privacy practices and book publishing agreements triggered intense media scrutiny and federal interest in the online giant’s business practices. His critique of patents on human embryonic stem cells has been key to expanding the ability of American scientists to conduct stem cell research. He has ensured that California’s taxpayer-funded stem cell research will lead to broadly accessible and affordable medicine and not just government-subsidized profiteering. Prior to joining Consumer Watchdog in 2005, he was executive editor of Tribune Media Services International, a syndication company. Before that, he was deputy editor of USA Today and editor of its international edition. Simpson taught journalism a Dublin City University in Ireland, and consulted for The Irish Times and The Gleaner in Jamaica. He served as president of the World Editors Forum. He holds a B.A. in philosophy from Harpur College of SUNY Binghamton and was a Gannett Fellow at the Center for Asian and Pacific Studies at the University of Hawaii. He has an M.A. in Communication Management from USC’s Annenberg School for Communication.

Contact the author

Leave a Reply