NZ authorities considering investigation of Google

SUBSCRIBE
Newsletter & Subscriptions Computerworld is New Zealand's only specialised information systems fortnightly.
Subscribe now for $100 (23 issues) and save more than 37% off the cover price!
SIGN UP
Newsletter & Subscriptions
Get the latest news from Computerworld delivered via email.
Sign up now
Privacy Commissioner's office to meet with Police today
  • Share

Google could face a criminal investigation for collecting personal wireless internet data from New Zealanders while filming for its Street View project.

The privacy scandal has sparked fears that Google intercepted personal banking details and could link people's internet behaviour to home addresses.

Assistant Privacy Commissioner Katrine Evans said her office would discuss with the police today whether Google should be investigated for breaching the Crimes Act.

It was already working with privacy commissioners in other countries, including Australia and Canada, to determine whether the internet search giant had breached the Privacy Act.

Matt Sumpter, a partner at law firm Chapman Tripp, said it was illegal under the Crimes Act to intentionally intercept a private communication with an interception device, although certain organisations such as the police and the SIS were exempt.

"On the face of things there certainly is reason for the privacy commissioner to be concerned, and every reason for the commissioner to be discussing what is potentially a very serious issue with the police."

The usual penalty was up to two years' imprisonment, but courts could instead impose a fine and must take into account the financial capacity of the offender, he said.

"You're looking here at a very, very large organisation and the depth of its pockets would be a material factor."

The Australian Federal Police is investigating possible breaches of that country's Telecommunications Interceptions Act.

Federal Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said Google could have "hoovered" up data from banking transactions, but the company has denied this.

Ms Evans said it was not known what information Google had collected.

"It's all pretty speculative at the moment. We don't know whether it's the actual content of communications or [data saying] this computer spoke to this computer at this time."

Google had "locked down" the data while affected countries investigated the matter.

If the office found Google had breached the Privacy Act, it could request the company make various undertakings about how it behaved in future, and compensate any individuals who were harmed by the breach, she said.

If Google refused to observe the undertakings, the office could ask the Human Rights Review Tribunal to order it to do so.

Google has admitted collecting public wi-fi data in more than 30 countries while it photographed streets and homes using cars equipped with 3-D cameras for its Street View mapping service.

Spokeswoman Annie Baxter said it was "profoundly sorry" for its mistake, and would work with authorities to answer any questions they had.

Ms Baxter said the kind of information collected would have been limited because its cars were on the move and a person would have had to be using their wi-fi network when Google drove by. It had not collected encrypted data, which usually includes bank transaction data.

Comments
Jesus christ! WHO CARES, It's google, who gives a crap what they collect, it won't make any differenace and will not affect you.

For example if the payload they grabbed contained 4 txt files for example, 3 were just random sentances meaning nothing and the 4th was your bank account number, they would not care about it, they would just delete anything that does not make sense or useful for them, they are not like hackers wanting your credit card information......

Stop being so scared, if you leave sensitive info on your PC without it being protected then you deserve to have it lifted via wifi.... idiots..
Posted by Ryan at 9:43:38 on June 11, 2010

Flag abuse

ever left your door unlocked? you seem pretty sure that ignorance about IT is a good enough reason for anyone to take what is not theirs.

Tell me how you'd feel if your car was stolen and trashed with a note left saying "door was unlocked so we took it cos your stupid"

and then you have no insurance for it as you left the door unlocked.

You'd beatch and moan about it, and take the poor unsurance company to task.

This is no different, just your perception is.

Relax and let everyone have their own opinion.
Posted by soap byte at 21:26:28 on June 11, 2010

Flag abuse

Try this BETTER search: http://www.pingar.com/ http://www.pingar.com/

Google gives you random results based on how it's spiders read the available website with "what it finds and decides to be right and relevant info".

This can be quite randon and as it only search 20% of the available info, you can miss the best moest relevant info, which is why you have to refine your searches, add or take words out.

This new-ish search engine searches and creates what is like a contents page of all the info (which is why google rank pages based on the number of times they are selected - to give you more relevant info based on the fact, the more people choose certain pages, the better info it must be)

Pingar just does it, thats what it does.

try it - it's new-ish, so bear with it, it it doesn't quite get it right...
Posted by Soap Byte at 20:27:16 on June 10, 2010

Flag abuse

they did not just collect SSID name LOL you are wrong, you clearly don't know much about WiFi technology

they did not just collect the SSID name, they collected far far more data than that

the independant review of the WiFi code Google use shows that they redirected unencrypted data including payloads onto their hard drives for later use

that clearly is intercepting transmissions

turning off SSID broadcasting doesn't make any difference, Google will still collect information from your WiFi when the car drove past.
Posted by google is evil at 13:05:10 on June 10, 2010

Flag abuse

Prove it well if your so sure, then why don't you prove it?

If you don't work for them, how can you be so sure they didn't collect more?

Let them reassure us with proof, not smart remarks.

There are other search engines out there, we have choice.
Posted by soap byte at 7:42:30 on June 10, 2010

Flag abuse

What a waste of resources. This is so laughable.
All they collected were the SSIDs being broadcasted by wireless devices which ANYONE can do at ANYTIME.
This info is simply the name you set for your wireless device and most people don't change it.
No privacy has been breached.
Unless you've included your name or address in your SSID there's nothing to link it to you.
If you're that paranoid you can usually set your router so that it doesn't broadcast this info, not that that will actually stop someone with nefarious intentions anyway...

Posted by LOL at 15:58:52 on June 9, 2010

Flag abuse

computerworld
Computerworld NZ has now reached LinkedIn! Join to expand your networks and meet others interested in information systems.