MPs slam Google in landmark parliamentary debate in internet privacy
In a landmark parliamentary debate on internet privacy this afternoon, Members of Parliament launched a stinging attack on Google for its harvesting of sensitive personal information by its Street View vehicles.
Today’s debate was one of crucial importance.
Given the number of contributions this afternoon from Members of Parliament across the political divide, Google must now sit up and take notice of the numerous concerns amongst parliamentarians in relation to the company’s reckless approach to personal privacy.
Ed Vaizey MP, the minister at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport with responsibility for internet issues, indicated that he would be speaking to Google as a matter of urgency to convey the concerns of Members. A verbal ticking-off from Minister is, however, nothing more than a slap on the wrist – and this simply doesn't go far enough when it comes to disciplining the company for one of the most significant invasions of personal privacy in British history.
It is a great shame that the Metropolitan Police have let Google off the hook when it comes to launching a criminal investigation into the company's conduct. The puts the ball very much back into the Information Commissioner’s court. Thus far the Commissioner has been an apologist for the worst offenders in his sphere of responsibility, not a policeman of them. Following on from today's debate, let's hope that he now shows some teeth and punishes Google for their wrongdoing
Big Brother Watch would like to extend it sincere thanks to the debate's initiator Robert Halfon MP.
The full list of MPs who attended is as follows: Ed Vaizey MP (Minister for the Internet), Mike Weir MP (in the Chair), Michael Ellis MP, Mike Weatherley MP, Damian Collins MP, Julian Huppert MP, Rt Hon David Davis MP, Ian Lucas MP, Robert Goodwill MP, Robin Walker MP, Mark Lancaster MP, Chris D. Kelly MP, Damian Hinds MP, Don Foster MP, Bob Stewart MP, Nigel Dodds MP, Sir Alan Beith MP, Nadine Dorries MP, Eric Joyce MP, Jane Ellison MP, Steve Baker MP and Dominic Raab MP.
9 Comments
Anonymous Coward
28th October 2010Seriously? It’s not like Google went out of their way to harvest this data by subterfuge, and when the mistake was uncovered they’ve taken steps to correct it, and profusely apologised.
For the members of this particular institution to criticise others when it comes to matters of privacy and snooping is frankly laughable.
Jimmy
28th October 2010I trust Mr. Coulson is drafting a strongly worded statement for the government as we speak.
Purlieu
28th October 2010Google tried to cover up their deed with lies.
Then they admitted it but lied about the scope.
Now they admit the scope, but they still cling on to that implausible defense.
Their search engine is skewed by advertising pressures.
Why should I believe anything further from them.
NeverSurrender
28th October 2010There is absolutely no chance whatsoever that Google did this accidentally.
The big problem with all data collection is that it is an ‘opt out’ setup rather an ‘opt in’ one. Changing to a legally binding ‘opt in’ system would solve most objections.
Juan Canham
28th October 2010This is trivial to do accidentally and only got information from unsafe wifi networks. e.g if your wifi is open
How it was done is simple:
1) run airodump with a gps wrapper script to collect strengths and locations of wifi signals
2) dump data for analysis at google HQ
3) realize that you’ve got all the unsecured traffic from people with unsecured wifi and admit it, then delete unneeded data
But hey don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant
martin brown
28th October 2010You have slightly misled people here. The list of MPs provided by you do not all hold the same views about the internet or google. I notice quite a few are members of the Digital Economy All Party Parliamentary Group… a new and very active appg. Its good to get a range of views in a debate like this.
//www.deappg.co.uk
Purlieu
29th October 2010Juan – what is a photo car doing with wifi gear in the first place ?
Daniel Hamilton
29th October 2010@martinbrown
Thanks for your comment, Martin.
I really do disagree with you that we have made any attempt to mislead anyone reading the post in any way.
The list of names I posted is a comprehensive list of everyone who attended the debate, regardless of how long they were there or the points of view they expressed – which, for the record, were unanimously sympathetic towards Robert Halfon’s opening remarks (as recorded on the public record in Hansard).
Anon
29th October 2010Purlieu: They were making a note of the locations of any routers they could find for future use in allowing users of Android phones to find find their location without needing to use GPS.
Each wifi hotspot has a (mostly) unique number associated with it. Google wanted to make a note of the location of each of these numbers so that a mobile phone application can guess the phone’s location based on which hotspots are nearby.
Juan has outlined one of many ways they could have inadvertently captured more information than they wanted. They didn’t go around trying to hack into wifi networks, or to steal data, they were just recording the data that was being broadcast and could be received from the street.