SiliconANGLE » EPIC

Google Comes Clean with Controversial Street View Project

Mellisa Tolentino — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:30:15 +0000

Last week the Federal Communications Commission finally closed their Google Street View probe after the search giant agreed to pay the $25,000 fine requested by the FCC.

Unfortunately, not everyone was happy about this, wanting Google to pay more or be put on trial for gathering Wi-Fi data in their Street View project.

So over the weekend, Google published a copy of a document which details the scope of the Street View project, drafted in response to the FCC’s letter of inquiry. When the FCC first released the document, a lot of information was redacted so Google released the full document but changed the names of the people mentioned.

The unredacted document now shows when the Street View project started, that several employees and at least one senior manager knew of the data gathering, making frequent references to a certain Engineer Doe whose software tool is designed to collect payload data, which may be useful in Google’s other services.

The issue now is that when the probe started, Google employees denied knowledge of data gathering over Wi-Fi networks but the document they released now clearly stated that a group of people – Engineer Doe and two other engineers, the senior manager, and other Google employees – knew about the situation.

So why did Google decide to publish the said document? The search giant just wanted the whole thing to be over so everyone can move on.

“We decided to voluntarily make the entire document available except for the names of individuals,” said Google spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker “While we disagree with some of the statements made in the document, we agree with the FCC’s conclusion that we did not break the law. We hope that we can now put this matter behind us.”

Is it really over?

Though Google just wants to move on, not everyone will be able to let things go easily. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) asked the Department of Justice to step in. EPIC believes that $25,000 is not enough to cover the damages since Google collected a huge amount of information like names, addresses, telephone numbers, URLs, passwords, e-mail, text messages, medical records, video and audio files, and other information from Internet users in the United States for more than two years.

Others are still arguing that gathering such information shouldn’t have been included in the Google Street View project, since the focus of the projects should have been just taking street view photos of cities in order to make users feel like they’re actually in that location. Those people who had their data collected weren’t asked by Google for their permission to do so and that is invasion of privacy.

Google Comes Clean with Controversial Street View Project is a post from: SiliconANGLE
We're now available on the Kindle! Subscribe today.

In the same vein:

Google’s “Share Plus Your World” Raises More Privacy Issues

Mellisa Tolentino — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:50:26 +0000

Google has been known as “The Search Giant” for years now, and people who were annoyed by commonly asked questions came up with a snappy retort to these unending queries: “Google it.”

Last year, Google+ launched. It was Google’s latest attempt at social networking. With that, Google decided that people aren’t only searching about content on the net, people are now interested in finding others and knowing about them, so they came up with Social Search to connect more people. And just a few day ago, they added three new features to the service:

Personal Results, which enable you to find information just for you, such as Google+ photos and posts—both your own and those shared specifically with you, that only you will be able to see on your results page;
Profiles in Search, both in autocomplete and results, which enable you to immediately find people you’re close to or might be interested in following; and,
People and Pages which helps you find people profiles and Google+ pages related to a specific topic or area of interest, and enable you to follow them with just a few clicks. Because behind most every query is a community.

The service, along with the added new features, make up Searh Plus Your World, which blends photos, comments and news posted on Google+ into search results – cool huh?
Not really, especially if you’re Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center who thinks that this is another way of Google manipulating search results which they think the FTC should really look into.

“We believe this is something that the FTC needs to look at,” Rotenberg said. ”Google is an entrenched player trying to fight off its challenger Facebook by using its market dominance in a separate sector. I think that should trouble people.”

This raises privacy issues as well since anyone who has a Google+ account can be Googled by anybody.

“Although data from a user’s Google+ contacts is not displayed publicly, Google’s changes make the personal data of users more accessible,” EPIC said in a note on his website.

Google Fellow Amit Singhal answers this concern by stating that Google has taken significant steps to make its new feature private and secure. He also said that Google was open to including information from Facebook, Twitter and other social networks.

“However,” Singhal said that “it has to be done in a way that the user experience doesn’t deteriorate over time and that users are in control over what they see from whom and not some third party.”

It’s easy for people to get riled up over just about anything Google does to change its search process, and layering in personalized content is something Google’s going to have to defend tooth and nail. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Google wants to incorporate its social network with search–everything Google does has an ulterior motive of looping back to its search technology, and when it comes to leveraging the wider social graph, aiding its primary search function is the primary reason for launching such an integrated Google+ network in the first place.

As with most things Google does, they’ll have to carefully consider how, when and where Google+ is integrated with their main search tool, and ensure that all privacy measures are taken to pacify the public.

Google’s “Share Plus Your World” Raises More Privacy Issues is a post from: SiliconANGLE
We're now available on the Kindle! Subscribe today.

In the same vein:

People Clash over Govt. use of “Pre-Cog” Data Tip-Offs

Mellisa Tolentino — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 12:07:07 +0000

Minority Report is an oft-cited movie for emerging technology in touch screens and robots. But what if I told you that the government really has pre-cognitive technology sans the pre-cogs. Unrealistic? Think again.

According to a report in the US Department of Homeland Security, they have an ongoing project that collects data, like “video images, audio recordings, cardiovascular signals, pheromones, electrodermal activity, and respiratory measurements, from test subjects, which includes some DHS employees and volunteer civilians, which will tip-off law enforcement if a person is about to commit a crime. The project is led by Robert Middleton Jr.

“The Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate Human Factors/Behavioral Sciences Division (HFD) Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) project is an initiative to develop a prototype screening facility containing a suite of real-time, non-invasive sensor technologies to detect cues indicative of mal-intent (the intent or desire to cause harm) rapidly, reliably, and remotely. The system will measure both physiological and behavioral signals to make probabilistic assessments of mal-intent based on sensor outputs and advanced fusion algorithms and measure indicators using culturally neutral and non-invasive sensors. FAST uses an established independent peer-review process to ensure objectivity and thoroughness in addressing all aspects of the program.”

EPIC, a public interest research center in Washington, D.C. established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values, requested the DHS to give them copies of the FAST Project Privacy Threshold Analysis and Record of review and approval of the Privacy Threshold Analysis by DHS Privacy Officer, under the Freedom of Information Act.

The DHS obliged and gave EPIC a copy of their requested documents, but much of the information had been redacted. This only made the public question DHS’ motives and concern for public security and privacy rose. The DHS assures the public that if this project does go public, it will be used in airport checkpoints, border crossings, sea ports or major sporting events. An in compliance for all ethical and regulatory requirements, aside from collecting an informed consent from all test subjects, they would also collect demographic information such as age, gender, occupation and ethnicity, medical information, current medications and substances used in the last week prior to the start of the test, including caffeine, alcohol, tobacco and others.

An article from CNET contains contradicting answers from DHS informing the public that FAST “does not store any personally-identifiable information (PII) from participants once the experiment is completed. The system is not designed to capture or store PII. Any information that is gathered is stored under an anonymous identifier and is only available to DHS as aggregated performance data. It is only used for laboratory protocol as we are doing research and development. It is gathered when people sign up as volunteers, not by the FAST system. If it were ever to be deployed, there would be no PII captured from people going through the system.” But the DHS Privacy Office said in a statement that FAST “is a privacy sensitive system,” which DHS defines as ”any system that collects, uses, disseminates, or maintains” personally-identifiable information.”

Even before pre-cogs begin their tenure with the government, issues arise over the legal use of data. It’s a matter we should probably sort out before the psychics lend their ability to analyze future data, since a large pool of anonymous data can only be created by amassing and cleaning individual data. It’s a predicament that’s landed Google in hot water with the EU over its Maps service, and sent both Google and Apple before authorities to defend their use of location-based tracking. And the issue will only gain attention as the government finds more use cases for the data collective we’re building across different locations, disciplines and activities. Big data analysis enables a unification of sorts for all the disparate data currently out there, promising to make sense of the big picture, and for the greater good. The question remains, however, what compromises will we have to make as a people for that greater good?

People Clash over Govt. use of “Pre-Cog” Data Tip-Offs is a post from: SiliconANGLE
We're now available on the Kindle! Subscribe today.

In the same vein:

Far From Game Over: Summer Hackfest Tours Gaming, Social Realms

Cherr Aira — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:16:56 +0000

Hacking is a touchy topic inside and out of tech society. But it comes with certainty that there will always be cases of data exposure, breaches and cyber-attacks. As the hacking feast continues, the casualties like Sony PlayStation Network try to recover from the pitfalls of multiple attacks and a never-ending summer of hacker dominance.

Over 100 million accounts were compromised when Sony PlayStaton Network battled a month-long scramble with hackers. As expected, Sony shuffled its management two months after the hacking incidents that prompted the closure of PlayStation Network. Andrew House, then-European business unit head assumed leadership of the Sony Computer Entertainment unit replaced Kazuo Hirai just a week ago. Following this move and the reviving of the gaming unit, PlayStation released a teaser for the multiplayer beta for Unchartered 3: Drake’s Deception. With gamers wanting more, PlayStation is looking at a possible redemption on November 1^st, the official date of the game’s worldwide launch.Furthermore, Sony is already setting up all channels to restore PlayStation in Japan. Despite major losses, Sony remains one of Asia’s most valued brands.

Authorities are now going after suspects of a series of cybercrimes. But amidst all of these efforts, hackers are still enjoying their game. In June alone, seven gaming developers became victims of series of hacking episodes. These include Epic Game, Nintendo, Codemasters, Sony and three others. Sega, another gaming biggie, also confirmed being hacked and placing over 1.3 million accounts in jeopardy, according to a Wall Street Journal report. Other organizations that have fallen prey to successful cyber-attacks include Apple and Fox. Both companies say that only small amounts of usernames and passwords were attacked.

Even with massive manhunt globally, there seems to be no stopping these hackers from doing what they do best; steal. LulZec crackdown was quite a victory, but with the attention it received and possible money from intruding websites, there maybe tons of other “hacking start-ups” waiting to attack and progress. This reality calls for all organizations to beef up their arsenals to safeguard their data.

Far From Game Over: Summer Hackfest Tours Gaming, Social Realms is a post from: SiliconANGLE
We're now available on the Kindle! Subscribe today.

In the same vein:

The FTC Ponders the Do-Not-Track Registry … Three Years Later

Mark 'Rizzn' Hopkins — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:30:16 +0000

There’s nothing like bringing back a classic, something that Democrat senators Jay Rockefeller and John Kerry are trying this week at online privacy hearings this week in the Senate.

I almost missed the news, but caught the recap this morning from Frank Reed over at Marketing Pilgrim:

Don’t think that just because Facebook has managed to not completely trample people’s privacy as of late that there is not more activity around the subject. In fact, forces in Washington, this time the FTC (Federal Trade Commission), are speaking at ‘hearings’ that are looking into this issue right now with talk of a “do not track” list. This is not the first time the subject has been raised (2007 it got some attention) but in light of recent online privacy ‘dust-ups’, this idea may have a real chance to develop.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) both expressed concern that privacy policies weren’t giving Web users enough useful information about online ad practices.

Rockefeller proposed that some companies were burying too much information in lengthy documents that consumers don’t read. “Some would say the fine print is there and it’s not our fault you didn’t read it,” he said, adding, “I say, that’s a 19th-century mentality.”

Kerry added that he didn’t know that consumers understood how companies use data. “I’m not sure that there’s knowledge in the caveat emptor component of this,” he said.

Sen. Rockefeller just tossed the advertising business so far into the past regarding their practices that the 20th century was ignored. I guess he made his point.

I haven’t covered this topic in depth since my early days at Mashable.

My analysis now is more or less the same as it was then:

There are very real privacy concerns with regards to user data, especially with recent developments in advertising relationships with Facebook and Microsoft, not to mention the ever advancing juggernaut of the Google data acquisition machine.

The Center for Democracy and Technology, Consumer Action, and the Consumer Federation of America as well as the Electronic Frontier Foundation are among the privacy advocates proposing for the do-not-track list. The groups are suggesting that there be a requirement that advertisers, as a part of their online ads, give those that they advertise to the details of what they intend to track about them.

It’s as if no one thought about the feasibility of enforcing restrictions on advertising companies, or how, for instance, you’d initiate an agreement to share demographic information with a user downloading an advertising supported podcast. In a world where these privacy advocates have their way, am I going to be inundated with privacy policy pop-ups every time I navigate to a new domain?

It’s simply not feasible for something like this to be executed, and even if it were, would we want the government in charge of enforcing compliance?

Aside from my Geico Caveman reference in my Mashable post, most of what I said stands the test of time. So little has changed. EPIC and CDD are still pushing for ridiculous restrictions on digital business, the FTC still doesn’t seem to understand how the web works, and big government is pushing for more digital regulation to protect us all from ourselves.

The bottom line is that behavioral ad networks sound more scary than they are in practice, and regulating the fundamentals of that business would knee-cap a large swath of the web. It should go without saying that this is a bad thing.

The FTC Ponders the Do-Not-Track Registry … Three Years Later is a post from: SiliconANGLE
We're now available on the Kindle! Subscribe today.