5 ms·

Don't panic! http://blog.hackensplat.com/2010/05/google-snooping-wifi-dont-panic-dont.html http://blog.hackensplat.com/2010/05/google-snooping-wifi-don... (Sha

• Spearchucker 15y ago
  From your link: "...your WiFi access point has to broadcast it’s identity to the public in the clear..." It doesn't. You can hide the SSID.
  • tomflack 15y ago
    Hiding the SSID breaks 802.11 specifications and isn't actually hidden anyway. It isn't private, it was never intended to be private.
  • deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  • itg 15y ago
    Extremely easy to get around and doesn't accomplish anything.
• BillPosters 15y ago
  Right on. The BBC article should link to this. Better that Google nabs unsecured data without intent that someone else with intent. Too much hype. What's worse than nabbing private packets is Google sticking a camera on a 10 foot pole and drive down residential back lanes where the camera can see over fences into private backyards and in some cases into living rooms. This happened in my town, to my house, and I felt my privacy was invaded. Google street view can see a lot more than someone walking along the street because nobody but Google is 10 feet tall.
  • anamax 15y ago
    > Google sticking a camera on a 10 foot pole ... Google street view can see a lot more than someone walking along the street because nobody but Google is 10 feet tall. No one else has 10 foot poles or can attach cameras to them? There's also satellite view....
• tseabrooks 15y ago
  Link mentions collecting that private data is illegal. Is this a UK thing? Is collecting that private data illegal in the US also? was under the impression it was not illegal in the US.
  • mattmanser 15y ago
    It's wire tapping which is illegal in pretty much every country.
    • LesZedCB 15y ago
      Then isn't everybody who ever connects to a public/open wifi "wiretapping?"
      • mattmanser 15y ago
        No, only if you set your network card to promiscuous mode and crack open a tool like Wireshark. Google kinda did that, but didn't ever actually access the data apparently: http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/28/justice-department-clears-google-of-wifi-wiretapping/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/28/justice-department-clears... TBH I'm just repeating what's been said here a few times like when that facebook snooping tool came out, I think it's all still a bit of a gray area. But basically unless you're google I wouldn't get caught snooping on a public wifi, you're liable to serve some jail time. Which kinda reminds me I think my laptop's card is still set to promiscuous atm.
• underwater 15y ago
  Did you read the BBC article? Your entire blog post tries to explain away the storing of private data as an accidental byproduct of capturing the names of access points. Even Google admitted this was not true. "Engineer Doe intended to collect, store and review payload data for possible use in other Google projects."
  • pixelbath 15y ago
    I feel like this sentence is misleading; it implies that the 'payload' Google's interested in is personal user data, as if Google has a team of engineers in its basements looking through the cat photos and credit card numbers it captured in Wi-fi packets. "Payload data," in this case, is most likely fragmented packets for which it can glean metrics on how to make the process more expedient in the future. Of course, I can't say this with 100% certainty, as I'm not involved, but the entire story seems geared to make Google's capture of radio-broadcast data packets seem far more sinister than it really is.