Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: goodroi
At the time, Google said it only collected "fragments" of personal Web traffic as it passed by, because its Wi-Fi equipment automatically changes channels five times a second. However, with Wi-Fi networks operating at up to 54Mbps, it always seemed likely that those one-fifth of a second recordings would contain more than just "fragments" of personal data.
That has now been confirmed by CNIL, which since June 4 has been examining Wi-Fi traffic and other data provided by Google on two hard disks and over a secure data connection to its servers.
"It's still too early to say what will happen as a result of this investigation," CNIL said Thursday.
"However, we can already state that [...] Google did indeed record email access passwords [and] extracts of the content of email messages," CNIL said.
... according to the French National Commission on Computing and Liberty (CNIL)
[edited by: engine at 9:27 am (utc) on Jun 19, 2010]
[edit reason] extended quote [/edit]
Packet sniffing programs, like "wardriving" are not inherently illegal according to FBI Special Agent Eric Brelsford. He said, "It is not illegal to own or use them as long as you are using them on a network where you have authorization to capture that information."
[edited by: buckworks at 10:59 pm (utc) on Jun 20, 2010]
if the wardriving statement made in this thread is true...
With wifi sniffing and cracking it's an invisible crime the police can't even see making it a virtually toothless law until someone does something incredibly stupid, like Google did, and gets caught.
the point is not even 'listening' to the data but to record/store it.
In The United States of America, the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 made it illegal to initiate e-mail to a recipient where the electronic mail address of the recipient was obtained:
* Using an automated means that generates possible electronic mail addresses by combining names, letters, or numbers into numerous permutations.
* Using an automated means to extract electronic mail addresses from an Internet website or proprietary online service operated by another person, and such website or online service included, at the time the address was obtained, a notice stating that the operator of such website or online service will not give, sell, or otherwise transfer addresses maintained by such website or online service to any other party for the purposes of initiating, or enabling others to initiate, electronic mail messages.
Google was on public ground gathering public signals from public airwaves. Where's the trespass there?
What is needed is software to log illegal sniffing.
3. To send a transmission or signal; transmit.
I defy anyone to argue reasonably that a lack of encryption granted Google rights in respect of data storage.
Criminal investigations followed
[edited by: buckworks at 1:47 am (utc) on Jun 21, 2010]
Your best option is to always use a secure VPN and a 58 or 64-bit key minimum to avoid hackers and disconnect from the VPN after long periods because time is the hackers friend when analyzing VPN.
not try to live in a defensive paranoia like you're suggesting.
That’s the first thing that should be reassuring in all this — it’s not as if Google heard minutes or hours worth of what you were “saying” on the web.
As it seeks to destroy the data