It seems that Google’s continued mishandling of the wi-fi snooping incident means it has a different interpretation of the phrase “cooperating with authorities” than what the rest of us would reasonably expect.

They do know a bit about computers ... and us. Art by The Australian's Jon Kudelka / File

The New York Times recently reported that Google has given European investigators only remote access to data now stored in Mountain View, California. 

Data those investigators need to determine if Google breached various tough privacy laws.

Data which even Google admits was improperly taken from homes and businesses in over 30 countries.

Data that belongs to the citizens of those countries.

It’s a bit cute that now Google hides behind arguments it is protecting privacy of those citizens as its way of “fully cooperating” with the agencies tasked with protecting that privacy.

Now the investigators need to trust Google is giving them access to everything.  So much for cooperation.

On the 6th of June this year the Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland announced that the Australian Federal Police would investigate Google stating “In light of concerns having been raised by the public, my department thought there were issues of substance that were raised that require police investigation.”

This is in addition to actions being undertaken by the Office of Privacy Commissioner.

I’m guessing Google will cooperate with Australian agencies as completely as it has with the powerful European regulators.

We shouldn’t let it: Australian investigators need access to the original - forensically sound and untampered - evidence, as well as notes and records around the creation and discovery and continued use of the Street View data interception code.  And they need to interview engineering staff and management in Google who designed, deployed, authorised and used the code.

If all of those (and more) are not available in Australia then Australian authorities must move to secure that information at Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, California.  This is possible via Australia’s strong relationships with US agencies and existing international mutual assistance treaties.

Even if by some miracle the original hard drive is still in Australia and the police can seize it appropriately, most of the relevant witnesses, notes and records will be in the US, so investigators and technical experts should travel there to conduct their investigation, after interviewing whomever is relevant in Google’s Sydney offices.

At some point all private citizens affected by Google’s actions should be notified so that they may consider their civil options (as the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act allows) and that will only be possible if the Australian government holds the data and does not destroy it as has - wrongly - been suggested by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.

The public concerns referred to by the Attorney-General are justified, and a full account of the investigations and findings by the Australian Federal Police and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner should be made to the public.

Let’s hope that Google’s cooperation continues, maybe even matures.  Its high time it did.

Most commented

25 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • BJ says:

      07:33am | 08/07/10

      If Google’s actions upset you so much then I would hope you are also equally outraged over the government’s plans to force ISPs to store our web browsing history and filter what we can see.

    • DD Ball says:

      12:21pm | 08/07/10

      BJ, I agree with the point. What concerns me is not what Google did, but what has happened involving Google for which Google was not responsible for, but for which there was abuse. You see, I am a whistle blower who had appropriately reported on issues surrounding the 2002 death of school boy Hamidur Rahman. I had written a little on the matter in a blog, but also written a lot of other things on that blog and related blogs. 2.5 million words and images. In 2006, I was ordered by my employer to delete the material. The order could not be challenged due to abuse of process. Because Google did not allow editing of their site I was forced to delete my entire work in order to satisfy my employer’s abuse. I understand my material might still be available .. but i don’t have access to it. Further, the NSW parliament has been lied to by the NSW Government who claim that I did not do what I did. It gets worse, a third party set up a fake kiosk over my former address .. obscuring searches on related strings.
      My concern with Conroy’s censorship plans is related to this issue. I hope the extraneous material Google has is deleted. I care nothing for the distraction of a faux abuse of privacy .. if it is false.

    • Mark (not Day) says:

      08:32am | 08/07/10

      So this is the same AG that wants to intercept and retain data of ALL internet users for up to 10 years?
      I am more concerned about the Governments plans than I am of Google intercepting publically broadcast data from poorly secured wireless routers.

    • Sherekahn says:

      09:22am | 08/07/10

      Oh come on!  Australian Investigators:  “Australian investigators need access to the original - forensically sound and untampered - evidence,”
      Look before you leap.  It would require 1,000,000 high tech migrants to deal with this bureaucratic nightmare.
      As for, ‘cooperating with authorities,” GOOGLE ARE the authorities.  In fact, I envisage Google becoming ‘GOD,’ they are a new Religion.

    • Bob H says:

      09:46am | 08/07/10

      Desperate attempts to wrap google’s power up with bureaucratic process as the old power structures fail to keep up with what people want.  The piece appears to be a spruik to gain contracts from worried non technical ministers.

    • google=evil says:

      10:04am | 08/07/10

      Instead of making them tell us what they know about us why not put some thought in to the amount of data and information you give away?

      Look at all the google apps you come across, you dont think they are just free for you to use and thats the end of it? Not a chance, they will all send back info as to where you browse, when, how often etc, link this with things like google earth, gmail accounts and your contact lists and of those who have gmail accounts (which now requires a mobile number for activation verification) and mobile phone apps all send back huge amounts of info on you and your habbits. How do you think they get their traffic service? its done by people using google maps from their mobile!!

      They are out there to make money by data-mining, the best and easiest way to do it is with free services and a few million (to start with) brain washed users who will not stop talking about how great google are!

      Google dont like paying for anything so they will continue to force smaller businesses out of the market place by offering things for free & people are usually to dumb or blind to see what they are giving away!

      If you decide to buy in to the “google are the best” brainwashing and get google everything on your PC, Mac or Phone then you dont have the right to complain when they are “caught out” for doing something like the wifi incident as you are already giving them that info or more.

    • Aussiewazza says:

      10:16am | 08/07/10

      It’s now 10:00 A.M.  and only three comments.BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING US. Scares the hell out of you that somewhere there data is stored ready to access (or already continuously being accessed right now) from which each and everyone can be catagorised. No need for elections; just check through the e:mails for who wants what. And what if you are in conflict with Big Brother. Will someone visit with an offer you can’t refuse? Want to get rid of someone? Simple. Just build a profile in their name, compliment Hitler, open some kiddy porn, say something nice about Kevin Rudd,Critisize Islam, spel werds rong; It all goes into the pot. Best as Sargent Schults said ‘I see nothing, nothing.’ or safer ‘I SAY nothing.’ P.S. Just in case. This was written by someone else (not I) and I agree with whatever you the reader thinks.

    • Winston Smith says:

      11:56am | 08/07/10

      How do you know there weren’t hundreds of comments that just “disappeared”?

    • notworriedbygoogle says:

      11:51am | 08/07/10

      This article shows a rather poor understanding of data.
      1) google store their data in distributed filesystems, there is no “hard drive” for them to hand over.
      2) what possible difference does it make how they supply the data as long as they comply with legal requirements.
      3) how would them giving the authorities something physical be a guarantee it was all the data compared with remote access to the same data?

      And thats before we get down to the real issue for me in this, which is how is collecting stuff people are broadcasting to all in the vicinity be a violation of privacy in the first place. If I drive past someones house and look into the yard is that a violation of privacy? Its exactly the same thing.

    • Paul says:

      01:27pm | 08/07/10

      There would certainly have been hard drives in the Street View cars where the data would have first went.

      It probably doesn’t make sense to expect the the data to stay on those disks long though, Google would have probably offloaded the data at the end of each run and emptied the disk so it could be reused on the next run.

    • Paul says:

      12:22pm | 08/07/10

      I don’t see what benefit there is in giving the data to the government. We know what Google did and in general what they captured (small fragments of any unsecured communications sent on public airwaves using unsecured network).

      How does giving the government data the specific data change anything other than make things worse by putting potentially personal data in front of more peoples eyeballs?

      Either Google’s act was illegal or it wasn’t. That shouldn’t depend on the specific content that people happened to be broadcasting at the time.

      Personally I don’t see why it is illegal, if you are broadcasting data in public then you can’t blame people for recieving it.  If I’m talking to someone’s voicemail in a public space and you shout near me is it an invasion of your privacy if your voice happens to be recorded?

      Law enforcement agencies or Governments should provide Google with a public key with which they can encrypt all the data and retain that copy in case Law Enforcement later want it. All other copies should be destroyed. Google should give no personal data to any government without a court order saying so. That way Google will no longer have access to the data and Governments can only get it if they can justify it legally in a court of law.

    • vic says:

      12:27pm | 08/07/10

      Anyone usng Google’s cloud computing or an Android based phone has some real privacy and security issues facing them.
      Where is your data stored? How is it indexed? Where are the indexes stored? How is it backed up? Is it backed up? Where are the backups held? Which country does by data reside in? What privacy laws is that Coutnry subject to? How likely is it hackers form China have access to your private data?
      Sad thing is, Google can’t even answer these questions.

    • IT as a Service says:

      02:10pm | 08/07/10

      Eh? the cloud is an abstraction that allows the use of technology without bothering with labourious IT maintenance issues.  Google have certificated security and Business continuity way above most providers and corporates.  Many Corporates (overseas) are moving to cloud based systems (not just google) because old outdated and expensive IT departments are just too slow and scared to change in order to keep competitive.  Australia will as usual be 3 years behind but there are plenty over here converted already.

    • Frank says:

      12:51pm | 08/07/10

      If a private citizen did what Google have done, they would be labelled a hacker and prosecuted accordingly.  But (it appears) if a legitimate business does the same thing, they are less liable and have options to protect themselves from prosecution.  I should start a business, employ a group of hackers to work for me, sell the information to the highest bidder and live happily ever after.

    • N says:

      01:23pm | 08/07/10

      I don’t get this “public outrage”, seems like a beat up to me. Google just gathered ESSIDs, big deal. Go to your local shopping centre, flick on the WiFi on your mobile and your doing the same thing. Its hardly hacking….

    • Cat says:

      02:49pm | 08/07/10

      I am damn sight less worried about Google than I am about our own government. I am well aware that all my e-mail is already intercepted and scanned and the sites I visit are monitored. I have nothing to hide but I resent the lack of privacy.

    • Miles says:

      03:26pm | 08/07/10

      I think it’s funny about how everybody gets so defensive and ‘scared’ about their privacy - but when you break it down, people really don’t know what they are scared of.

    • Chris says:

      03:59pm | 08/07/10

      Potential loss of control over our own decision making I suspect.

    • Ned says:

      05:05pm | 08/07/10

      There was an old story one of my teachers told of a uni student who had to write an essay on the word ‘Why’. All he wrote in his essay was ‘Because’. He passed with flying colours (apparently).

      Google could do the same and simply say ‘Everything’.

    • Peter Stephens says:

      06:57pm | 08/07/10

      Sure lets waste lots of taxpayer $ chasing Google.  If people did the right thing and set up the encryption on their wifi routers then thedata could not so easily be intercepted.

    • Josh says:

      06:58am | 09/07/10

      I always find it funny when people keep bitching about Google and privacy.  The government has more info on any of us than Google, where are the demands for that information?  This recent wifi beat up against them is garbage, the ‘data’ they collected from the Street View scanning they did was nothing more than fragments, basically electronic confetti, they didn’t hack anyone, it was loose data that was inadvertently gathered because of unsecured networks, which could have been captured by anyone.  And we’re forgetting the other issue, Google admitted to it!  They could have swept it under the carpet but no they came out and fessed up, how many corporations would admit to something like that?  The real issue here is people using WIfi that isn’t secure, it’s the equivalent to leaving your keys in the car, yes it’s bad is someone steals your data but there is also a level of responsibility that falls on the user as well.

    • Joe says:

      11:36pm | 09/07/10

      The Labor government’s policy of wanting ISPs to keep a record of every website we visit for years is much worse than a few network names google might have notived when it drove down the street at 60k ph.

    • travel news says:

      05:03pm | 11/07/12

      Hey. I discovered the web site your in the search engines. This is a good article. I am going to make sure you take a note of it as well as come back to get more info of your information. Appreciate your article. I willdefinitely come back.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

Found a TV meteorologist on Twitter with the last name Piotrowski. There's a whole newsroom of Piotrowskis out there

Paul Colgan

RT @businessinsider: Man Being Questioned For Boston Bombing Connection Shot And Killed By FBI by @paulszoldrahttp://t.co/OtypP2PRgI

Daniel Piotrowski

This is a must read @TheAtlantic. Whether you think you know everything or think you know nothing http://t.co/naoUutCoWF

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @JoshuaWithers: Have you seen the Australian version of Breaking bad? He get's cancer and Medicare covers his costs and the series ends.

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter