U.S. top court rejects Google bid to drop Street View privacy case [illegal Wi-Fi wiretap]

Reuters ^ | June 30, 2014 | BY LAWRENCE HURLEY

[Jim Robinson]

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected Google Inc's bid to dismiss a lawsuit accusing it of violating federal wiretap law when it accidentally collected emails and other personal data while building its popular Street View program.

The justices left intact a September 2013 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which refused to exempt Google from liability under the federal Wiretap Act for having inadvertently intercepted emails, user names, passwords and other data from private Wi-Fi networks to create Street View, which provides panoramic views of city streets.

The lawsuit arose soon after the Mountain View, California-based company publicly apologized in May 2010 for having collected fragments of "payload data" from unsecured wireless networks in more than 30 countries.

Google was accused of having collected the data while driving its vehicles through neighborhoods from 2008 to 2010 to collect photos for Street View.

[867V309]

It is big government’s wet dream to have an unambiguous way to track Internet traffic of the masses down to the individual device.

It is big government’s wet dream to track everything all the time.

[BykrBayb]

If you fail to lock your wifi, doors, windows or automobiles you’re taking a risk. Would it be okay if they compiled a list of houses with unlocked doors and/or windows, and published the list?

[867V309]

Would it be okay if they compiled a list of houses with unlocked doors and/or windows, and published the list?

Sure nuff. Even better if they stepped inside and did an inventory.

[BykrBayb]

That would certainly be convenient. Don’t see how anyone could complain.

[867V309]

I'm sure the gibme underclass would. Probably get Morgoon & Morgoon (Florida) to file suit.

[Cato in PA]

"Your browser provides a lot information about your system, for example the browser type and version, the operating system type and version (including major service packs), the browser plug-ins and their versions, the screen resolution and DPI of your display. You add all that together and it makes a pretty good signature."

Just to follow up on this, you can check to see how unique your browser's signature is by using Panopticlick, a tool set up by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

There are many excellent tools available for Firefox browser that can assist you in protecting your privacy. Here are a few of my favorites:

• User Agent Overrider: Use this to change your browser's user agent so as to appear as generic as possible. You can get a list of the most popular user agents here.
• Adblock Edge: Use EasyList to block ads, EasyPrivacy to block trackers. Add the Fanboy social list to block Facebook buttons, etc. Social media sharing buttons track your browsing even if you don't have an account with them.
• Self-Destructing Cookies: Accepts cookies from Web sites but deletes them automatically when the tab you're using is closed unless you say otherwise. Fights tracking cookies.
• HTTPS Everywhere: An extension by the EFF. Enables secure connections whenever possible.
• NoScript: One of the best security and privacy tools that Firefox has to offer. NoScript has a significant learning curve, but if you master it, you can stop most threats cold. For example, try enabling NoScript and then going to Whatismybrowser. You'll see that it is impossible for that site to get a list of the plugins you have installed.

[upchuck]

IMHO, the fact that you can be tracked 24/7 if you use a cell phone is way more potentially invasive than this.

[gnarledmaw]

(The following post is based entirely on speculation and should be disregarded as nonsense.)

I don't. FWIW, Im not sure that Google actually does the driving. I suspect that the driving is contracted. I base this on having seen the job ads for drivers in this area (the contact was not Google) and the fact that the local Google truck parking lots were at businesses that had nothing to do with Google directly (for example, a local land survey company).

[VerySadAmerican]

Sounds like a good gig if you like to travel. Then again, I’m sure you’d have to go to the big city Amish areas.

[i_robot73]

Might be just my public education, but I don’t get it.

How SLOW does one have to drive to ‘...accidentally collected emails and other personal data...’

Even in my area, where there exists multiple SSIDs (all secure, so the little icon says), taking the strongest signal available; you’re still talking seconds to ‘handshake’, more still to snoop and more still to receive...all at the end/edge of these connections/from the street/etc before the signal drops ala range??

[BuckeyeTexan]

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

[DB]

The difference is, to access my unlocked doors/windows etc, you have to go onto my private property which I did not grant you permission to.

In the case of WiFi you are transmitting beyond your property onto your neighbors property and very likely public property, like the public street in this case. In addition the very airwaves that you are using are public and are not your private property to begin with.

If you want to use the public airwaves and expect any privacy it is your duty, and no one else’s, to encrypt your data.

[DB]

Thank you.

[DB]

They just capture random packets that could have anything in them as they pass by. Those random packets are likely stored on a hard drive along with the GPS location and processed at a later point to try to extract the SSID and whether it is encrypted or not.

So that captured packet could well have “personal” information in it which is what this uproar is about.

[ctdonath2]

But for a missing “s” the sentence makes perfect sense and is informed & informative.
That you don’t understand the technology involved doesn’t warrant insult.

[gnarledmaw]

No doubt, and Im sure the intensity of being in those areas makes one question their job choice.

Having said that, I live in an actual Amish area "way out in BFE" but they still managed to find and post my property so someone spent a lot of time, if not the majority, driving the countryside. All in all, it might not be too bad.

[TalonDJ]

What google did is more analogous to recording CB radio transmissions than wiretapping.

Not so. CB transmissions are intended for the receipt of others (and even then recording them might not be legal). Wi-Fi is not intended for people outside your property to use. This is more akin to going into someone's house and taking pictures of their mail just because the door was unlocked.

[TalonDJ]

If people talking in their house tend to shout you still aren’t allowed to record them even though the air being vibrated is public. this is the same, the vibration is just much higher frequency.

[Wayne07]

Sometimes wifi is intended for the receipt of others (e.g., starbucks, or my neigbor's "guest network"). If you are broadcasting an unencrypted signal, then I don't see how your analogy of going into someone's house fits - there is no intrusion.

It is more like they were taking pictures of the street, and you left your door open and they accidentally captured you naked as you were walking to the shower.

[ConservativeMind]

And Google knows each of us by IP and fingerprint (GoogleAnalytics). If people happen to be logged in to Gmail while logged on here. they know you even more.

Worse yet, they can identify you as single poster because Analytics updates/runs after each posting. A simple total line count compare could implicate you to your named Gmail account. By the way, I recall seeing Analytics run when crafting a post, so it knows you did that last comment with a very high probability.