5 ms·

This must be illegal, right?

Sr_developer 5y ago
In a sane country, yes.In corporate ruled America no. But the important thing is that Google put some rainbows from time to time.
lupire 5y ago
Why would collecting publicly advertised information be illegal?
- black_puppydog 5y ago
  I get your sentiment, but there is a big difference between that information being publicly available somewhere and someone building a centralized private database of it. At least, IF you assume that e.g. "database copyright" serves a valid purpose, then you could make a similar case here that the collection of all these data points is qualitatively different from collecting any single data point. Note: I used a capital "IF" up there because I do have issues with database copyright. But that's the world we live in...
- 0xEFF 5y ago
  If they did the same tracking but to other phones instead of access points would that cross a line?
  - betterunix2 5y ago
    Are you uncomfortable with the idea of someone monitoring the ISM band and collecting information about what is being transmitted and by which stations? If so, maybe you should stop using wifi, since that is actually part of the wifi standard (your phone is literally monitoring transmissions on your neighbors' wifi networks to avoid interference).
- tobr 5y ago
  Lots of publicly available information is illegal to collect, for copyright reasons, privacy reasons, security reasons, etc.
  - notriddle 5y ago
    Do you really want to make passive wardriving illegal? Literally anybody who sets up a wifi system has probably seen the list of other people's networks within a some-meter radius. How could you possibly think there's a reasonable expectation of privacy with your SSIDs?
    - tobr 5y ago
      I did not say I want to make it illegal, just pointing out that it’s not some completely bizarre idea. I think it would be reasonable to have various restrictions on all kinds of large scale datasets, especially when they include data that is easy to connect to individuals, and especially when it was not compiled with their explicit (informed, opt-in) consent. This includes public information such as what I’m wearing, where I am at what times, when and where my wifi is on.
    - 8note 5y ago
      I'd think there's a difference between use and abuse
- varispeed 5y ago
  The same way you cannot photograph people on the street and collect their facial image for processing. They publicly advertise their face though, right? Just the fact that information is available, it does not imply there is a consent for 3rd party to do anything with it.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Except you can? The courts (in the US) have consistently ruled that you have no expectation of privacy in the public square. ALPRs on police cars are perfectly legal if there’s no laws prohibiting them.
    - varispeed 5y ago
      Sure, take a picture of someone, so his or her face is the main content of the picture and start posting it everywhere (it's your picture so you can do whatever you want, right?). > ALPRs on police cars Government is usually exempt from those things or have license.
betterunix2 5y ago
Why would it be illegal to listen to or record broadcasts in the unlicensed ISM band? In fact monitoring the band is part of the wifi standard itself, as wifi devices are supposed to avoid interfering with each other even if they are not associated to the same AP. Most devices monitor the entire 2.4ghz and 5ghz bands for beacons from APs to give the user a listen of available networks and to support roaming.
- afandian 5y ago
  The Computer Misuse Act [0] makes it an offence to commit "unauthorised access to computer material". Obviously Google thinks they can get away with it, but it's an entirely reasonable question. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal, but their approach to tax hardly demonstrates good-faith approach to the law. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Misuse_Act_1990 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Misuse_Act_1990
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - betterunix2 5y ago
    IANAL but the fact that you are using wifi means that you are authorizing others to monitor everything you transmit -- that is literally in the wifi standard. It is also worth pointing out that no computers are being "accessed" here, we are talking about recording the wifi beacons that APs broadcast (also part of the standard), so the only relevant laws should be those governing radio equipment. Even if we wanted a world of tightly controlled access to radio receivers (again, we are talking about recording and not about transmitting), the ISM bands that wifi uses were specifically set aside for unlicensed use by the general public. The fact is that your ability to simply plug in a wifi router and use it with any devices you want, without having to coordinate with anyone or buy a SIM card or whatever else, comes with the understanding that anyone else can monitor your wifi network for any purpose (and in fact this is a requirement of the wifi standard). If monitoring someone's wifi transmissions required their explicitly approval, nobody would be able to use wifi -- every time you moved your phone from one place to another, you would first need permission from every wifi station operator to monitor their transmissions before your phone could use wifi (you would not even be able to join a network you had previously used, because doing so requires your phone to listen to beacons being transmitted by nearby APs).

In a sane country, yes.In corporate ruled America no. But the important thing is that Google put some rainbows from time to time.

lupire 5y ago

Why would collecting publicly advertised information be illegal?

black_puppydog 5y ago
I get your sentiment, but there is a big difference between that information being publicly available somewhere and someone building a centralized private database of it. At least, IF you assume that e.g. "database copyright" serves a valid purpose, then you could make a similar case here that the collection of all these data points is qualitatively different from collecting any single data point. Note: I used a capital "IF" up there because I do have issues with database copyright. But that's the world we live in...
0xEFF 5y ago
If they did the same tracking but to other phones instead of access points would that cross a line?
- betterunix2 5y ago
  Are you uncomfortable with the idea of someone monitoring the ISM band and collecting information about what is being transmitted and by which stations? If so, maybe you should stop using wifi, since that is actually part of the wifi standard (your phone is literally monitoring transmissions on your neighbors' wifi networks to avoid interference).
tobr 5y ago
Lots of publicly available information is illegal to collect, for copyright reasons, privacy reasons, security reasons, etc.
- notriddle 5y ago
  Do you really want to make passive wardriving illegal? Literally anybody who sets up a wifi system has probably seen the list of other people's networks within a some-meter radius. How could you possibly think there's a reasonable expectation of privacy with your SSIDs?
  - tobr 5y ago
    I did not say I want to make it illegal, just pointing out that it’s not some completely bizarre idea. I think it would be reasonable to have various restrictions on all kinds of large scale datasets, especially when they include data that is easy to connect to individuals, and especially when it was not compiled with their explicit (informed, opt-in) consent. This includes public information such as what I’m wearing, where I am at what times, when and where my wifi is on.
  - 8note 5y ago
    I'd think there's a difference between use and abuse
varispeed 5y ago
The same way you cannot photograph people on the street and collect their facial image for processing. They publicly advertise their face though, right? Just the fact that information is available, it does not imply there is a consent for 3rd party to do anything with it.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Except you can? The courts (in the US) have consistently ruled that you have no expectation of privacy in the public square. ALPRs on police cars are perfectly legal if there’s no laws prohibiting them.
  - varispeed 5y ago
    Sure, take a picture of someone, so his or her face is the main content of the picture and start posting it everywhere (it's your picture so you can do whatever you want, right?). > ALPRs on police cars Government is usually exempt from those things or have license.

betterunix2 5y ago

Why would it be illegal to listen to or record broadcasts in the unlicensed ISM band? In fact monitoring the band is part of the wifi standard itself, as wifi devices are supposed to avoid interfering with each other even if they are not associated to the same AP. Most devices monitor the entire 2.4ghz and 5ghz bands for beacons from APs to give the user a listen of available networks and to support roaming.

afandian 5y ago
The Computer Misuse Act [0] makes it an offence to commit "unauthorised access to computer material". Obviously Google thinks they can get away with it, but it's an entirely reasonable question. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal, but their approach to tax hardly demonstrates good-faith approach to the law. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Misuse_Act_1990 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Misuse_Act_1990
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- betterunix2 5y ago
  IANAL but the fact that you are using wifi means that you are authorizing others to monitor everything you transmit -- that is literally in the wifi standard. It is also worth pointing out that no computers are being "accessed" here, we are talking about recording the wifi beacons that APs broadcast (also part of the standard), so the only relevant laws should be those governing radio equipment. Even if we wanted a world of tightly controlled access to radio receivers (again, we are talking about recording and not about transmitting), the ISM bands that wifi uses were specifically set aside for unlicensed use by the general public. The fact is that your ability to simply plug in a wifi router and use it with any devices you want, without having to coordinate with anyone or buy a SIM card or whatever else, comes with the understanding that anyone else can monitor your wifi network for any purpose (and in fact this is a requirement of the wifi standard). If monitoring someone's wifi transmissions required their explicitly approval, nobody would be able to use wifi -- every time you moved your phone from one place to another, you would first need permission from every wifi station operator to monitor their transmissions before your phone could use wifi (you would not even be able to join a network you had previously used, because doing so requires your phone to listen to beacons being transmitted by nearby APs).