Met still weighing up Google data breach case

"the Information Commissioner has no responsibility for enforcing the law on interception of communications."

OK, then what does the ICO do and if not they, then who has?

However, "The case has not been closed,”.
Why, if "it does not have the power to act."?

Not saying there is anything to investigate - it would seem to be a waste of resources trying to find something, really. I suspect most of the countries going after Google for this have an eye on Google's profits more than anything else.

By greemble on 18 Aug 2010

If I walk up the street with my wifi-capable phone it will connect to any available unencrypted signal.

If this is illegal then someone oghta tell the equipment designers, because as-is it's designed to break the law automatically, without any user intervention whatsoever.

By Anteaus on 19 Aug 2010

For crying out loud

AS Antaeus said.... in that case nearly everyone with a wifi enabled device is just as guilty, as are the supposedly affected parties, as they have obviously made no effort to secure their network data and hopefully will be found in breach of Data protecton laws....well I can hope?

Yet again a party with a vested interest, rather than an injured party, is wasting Police time and MY MONEY... someone send them a bill

By mikeos on 19 Aug 2010

Totally agrre with mikeos

Why are we wasting money on pointless investigations like this.
What would Google do with the data anyway?
The publicity of a large corporation demonstrating how insecure WiFi routers are, is doing the public and the Internet at large a great service.
This level of publicity is far better than some geek blogging about how many WiFi routers they gained access to whilst war-driving.

By S_Elwell on 19 Aug 2010

Be very careful!

In reply to S_Elwell you ask 'what Google will do with the data anyway'
Well I understand that there is likely to be a new EU directive shortly, requiring all European Governments to fine people who do not secure their Wi-Fi connections!
Where do you think the authorities might get their information on these 'Criminals'?
Yep you got it they'll get it from google who will be required by law to hand it over, just like all the other information they gather.
Google has just become another info gathering department of the government.

By Citizen_s on 19 Aug 2010

MikeS

The whole thing is ludicrous. WiFi routers *broadcast* the data *unencrypted*. The whole point is so that others can receive it.

If you don't want that, set up WPA encryption. But many don't take *responsibility* for securing their own WiFi. So *they* or the *router manufacturers* are at fault, not Google.

If people were shouting out of their windows so that everyone in the street could hear, would Google or anyone else be considered to be breaching privacy laws if they recorded it as they drove past? There's no privacy if you're shouting for all to hear and the same is true of unencrypted WiFi.

By mikedscott on 19 Aug 2010

It all depends.....

Can someone clarify the law in this matter. My understanding (which might be wrong) is that if I was to access my neighbour's unencrypted WiFi without their permission, I would be breaking the law.

If that is the case, then Google capturing and storing the data of every house it has passed with it's street car (which is virtually the whole country!), is potentially infringing that rule many many times over and they should be taken to task for it. Privacy needs protecting and rules need upholding. (think of all the plain text email username & passwords they will have harvested!!!

Whether "intent" has a bearing too would be interesting. So the case of a mobile phone in your pocket automatically logging on to each unencrypted base station you passed would be one thing. However deliberately setting your phone with software to log and store all traffic it sniffed as you walked past, into a data capture file, would be much more intentional and malicious in intent. This is more like what Google have done.

Just because Google are big doesn't mean they shouldn't play by the same rules we all have to.

Leaving wifi unencrypted is a bit like leaving a front door wide open, but it would still be theft for someone to enter that property and take something not belonging to you. As I've said before, the problem with that analogy is that wifi signals are invisible! This means the average punter can't see that their wifi connection is wide open compared with someone leaving their front door open which is more obvious.

Can someone find out the law about "borrowing" a wifi connection, because there is a story in that area for an investigative journalist... and it heavily impinges upon this case regarding Google too.

By mdoragh on 19 Aug 2010

Wi-Fi and the Law

I am not a solicitor but my understanding of the law in the United Kingdom is that if you access the internet using a private Wi-Fi connection without the owners permission you are commiting an offence, I believe that this comes under the misuse of computers act.
You are not commiting an offence if your Laptop or Mobile detects and shows you these connections, only if you then connect to the internet using one of these connections.
If you give some one else permission to use your Wi-Fi connection, remember you are legally responsible for everything that person does using your connection.
My understanding is that it will soon be an offence under EU legislation to have an unsecured Wi-Fi connection, so watch out! What bothers me about such legislation is that, it will be pensioners and people who have no idea about these things that will yet again suffer and be fined.

By Citizen_s on 21 Aug 2010