Google Maps Street View ‘may be a security threat"

[Ronski]

Google Maps Street View ‘may be a security threat’

Belfast Telegraph

Saturday, 21 March 2009

A new internet street map could be putting the public and members of the security forces in danger, a local Assemblyman has warned.

The Street View UK service, launched by Google amidst much publicity this week, allows members of the public to pick a spot on a map and ‘zoom’ in to see photos of the area.

However, Stormont Assembly member Ian Paisley jnr has branded the internet giant “reckless� for including photos of the perimeters of police stations and army barracks in Northern Ireland.

The entrance gates and perimeters of most police stations in greater Belfast are visible on the service and, according to BBC Northern Ireland, in one photo the number plate of a car entering a police station was unblurred.

Mr Paisley, who is also a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, said the move was “incredibly stupid�.

“This endangers the public,� he said. “Even though the images can be removed they are now out there. It will be a case of bolting the stable door. The people who have been viewing the images should be traced by the security services.�

Google said the images on its new service were “no different from what a person can readily see or capture walking down the street. Imagery of this kind is available in a wide variety of formats for cities all around the world�.

A Google spokeswoman added: “We spoke to the Police Service of Northern Ireland before we started driving, and made sure they were aware of the project — they did not raise any concerns.

“In fact, the police in the UK and elsewhere have welcomed Google Maps and Street View as a helpful tool to raise awareness of crime, and in some cases even help deal with crime itself.�

[Ronski]

Comment's - Belfast Telegraph

Google's response to this is spot on. It isn't reckless or stupid to make photos taken from a public highway available: this service isn't providing any information that isn't easily available already.

This is just another example of a politician taking uninformed pot-shots to pander to public concerns and get a few more column inches in their press cuttings file.

Posted by Matthew | 21.03.09, 07:57 GMT


Comment - Against

They've a picture of my house on it! Paranoia sets in. Just by knowing my post code some lunatic could see where I live! No..... wait...... that can happen already.

Posted by Farrah | 21.03.09, 09:24 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

Catch a grip, for a start the photos are old, at least a year and if someone really wants to target a police station what's to stop them driving past and taking their own photo?!

Posted by Kat | 21.03.09, 14:47 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

Brilliant idea for anyone thinking of moving to an area and possibly looking for a property.

Posted by d clack | 21.03.09, 16:39 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

I fully understand about the security that is stated on this page, but I have lived in Australia since 1978, but i am still British, and would love to see places that I lived at and achools that i went to back in England

Posted by MRS SYLVIA C CUMMINS | 22.03.09, 03:37 GMT

Comment - Moaning

The images in google maps are very low resolution. In most cases even street signs are illegible in street view. It would in fact be a better service if higher resolution images were available as you could identify landmarks better when traveling to places you are unfamiliar with. If an individual was really interested in gathering intelligence about entrance and exit points of military barracks or police stations for illegal reasons that person would do much better and could take far higher resolution images by simply going to these publicly accessible places themselves and simply taking a picture with a half decent camera.

Posted by Haydn | 22.03.09, 04:40 GMT

Comment - Waste of money

complete rubbish, the though that a photograph on the web is any form of security issue is complete rubbish, what next lets get rid of maps, cameras, pens and paper.

We have people on this planet starving to death and people are concered about some pictures on the internet.

Posted by Craig | 22.03.09, 07:28 GMT

Comment - Against

I find this invasive and potentially harmful - I work in a secure environment and pictures of our workplace, where people can be clearly identified, are now on google maps. It seems very little thought has gone into harmful ways this could be used.

Posted by ohnoron | 22.03.09, 16:25 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

Excellent service and I do not quite understand the furore causedby it . Perhaps I am just insensitive but so much is known about us anyway . This is a labour that I find interesting and informative , so more power to your elbow !

Posted by t. gardener | 22.03.09, 18:24 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

i think it is a good idea.
there are other things similar to this already available on the internet. so why not?
i think people are just being paranoid, because if someone did want to break into a police station or whatever they are concerned about; this may help them but if they really wanted to break in then they would do it anyways, regardless of google's new street view map.

Posted by alys | 22.03.09, 21:24 GMT

[Ronski]

Google removes Street View images of naked children

Belfast Telegraph

Monday, 23 March 2009

Google has been forced to remove photographs of naked children from its Street View service over the weekend as a row over internet privacy escalated into one about public safety.

The Independent on Sunday alerted the internet search giant after finding images of the toddlers, playing at a family summer picnic in a garden square in north London, captured permanently on the revolutionary mapping system. Britain's privacy watchdog, the Information Commissioner Richard Thomas, is considering an investigation into Google if more images of naked children are found to have been picked up by its cameras and made available.

Google has had hundreds of requests for images to be removed since it launched Street View on Thursday, including pictures of members of the public leaving sex shops or vomiting in the street. But the pictures of children suggest the service could be exploited for more sinister purposes.

The new mapping service, which covers more than 22,000 miles, covers 25 UK cities including Belfast allowing millions across the world to take a ‘virtual stroll’ through our streets.

It also emerged that Tony and Cherie Blair are among hundreds of people who have demanded that close-up photographs of their homes be removed. The Blairs' home in Connaught Square, west London, was blacked out on Friday after nearly 24 hours on the web. Pictures of Downing Street were also taken down, although it is not a private address and the location is photographed by millions of tourists every year.

The images of the children were taken last summer and show a typical scene of garden square life in a quiet side-street — a location many families would deem semi-private and where they would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The IoS is not naming the address, but the square is yards from a Cabinet minister's home, although the children are not related to that minister.

The images of the garden square were removed by Google within an hour of the company being informed yesterday. The picture had been found by this newspaper in only 10 minutes, suggesting there could be many similar images on the website.

The Tory MP Edward Garnier said: “The right to privacy, and not to become the victim of some corporation's profit-making activities, is clearly something that needs to be protected.

“We all have an expectation that our privacy should not be invaded or exploited for commercial purposes.�

A spokesman for the Information Commissioner's Office said: “We will consider the IoS story carefully. Images of children must be blurred. If what has been uncovered is systemic, we will take up the matter with Google.�

A spokeswoman for Google said: “We will remove these pictures as quickly as possible.�

[Ronski]

Comments - Belfast Telegraph

Comment - Moaning
Poms are just doing their usual.....whinging!

Posted by Trevor | 23.03.09, 03:44 GMT

Comment - Thumbs up

Google only took pictures of public places so I do not understand all this privacy row, if you walk down a street people can see you. I spent a while going around my local area looking for me I would have loved it if I found myself and would show it to everybody!

Posted by BILL | 23.03.09, 08:40 GMT

Comment - Not Happy

You would whinge too if your kids were on there naked!

Posted by sharon | 23.03.09, 09:20 GMT

Comment - Good One

Its funny how Tony and Cherie Blair and Gordon Brown don't like it when they feel they're privacy is invaded, yet they are happy enough for the rest of us to live in a surveillance state with the largest amount of CCTV in Europe and an extensive number of databases holding our personal details.

Posted by Paul | 23.03.09, 09:22 GMT

Comment - Good One

Dont understand all this fuss, these are pictures taken from public streets, all legal. If you want privacy then close your curtains! does this mean that tourists cannot take pictures incase they snap a passer-by and breach their privacy? What about people who get a picture taken of their house to sell it? is this not the same thing?
Its hypocritical of Downing Street to be removed but I can go down there and take a picture myself no questions asked. What did terrorist do before this? they went and took pictures! If sombody wants to do something to someone or their property they will do it regardless of this service by google.

Posted by Serial whingers | 23.03.09, 11:53 GMT

Comment - Good One

All this imbecillic ranting about being seen in public in the street by Google's cameras is pure English and British lower class hype. For the past several years there have been a hundred thousand government CCTV cameras recording our every move and actions, gloated over by the perverts that apply for monitoring jobs. Not to mention the thousands of private clips being passed around by the CCTV operatives.

Posted by jack buoy | 23.03.09, 12:14 GMT

[Ronski]

Google 'trying to smear Street View critic'

Belfast Telegraph

Privacy campaign head claims technology giant linked him to rival Microsoft

Saturday, 28 March 2009

What started as tensions between a privacy campaign group and Google over its controversial mapping service Street View has spilled over into claims of conspiracy theories.


Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, believes Google is trying to discredit the complaints he has registered about Street View by briefing against him to journalists.


In an open letter to Google's chief executive Eric Schmidt, Mr Davies accused it of secretively briefing against him, claiming he was supported by, and biased in favour of, Microsoft – one of Google's biggest competitors. Google has openly affirmed its belief in the relevance of connections between Microsoft and 80/20 Thinking, a data protection consultancy run by Mr Davies.


"Neither Microsoft nor [its PR company] Burson-Marsteller has ever paid money to either Privacy International or 80/20 Thinking, nor has any benefit in kind been given," Mr Davies wrote in his letter. "We are quite frankly stunned that a company such as Google would take steps... to peddle groundless conspiracy theories in an attempt to besmirch a critic. You should be ashamed of your actions. Google is coming across as a desperate company resorting to desperate measures."


In response, Google has persisted with the assertion that Mr Davies' connections to Microsoft should be made clear in public. A spokesman said: "Simon Davies regularly attacks Google on privacy grounds. It's no secret that we believe the credibility of his criticisms is undermined by the fact that, alongside his work for Privacy International, he acts as a consultant to a number of technology companies who are direct rivals to, and in some cases vocal critics of, Google – a fact he rarely seems to disclose in his press releases or comments to the media. We work hard to make sure our users understand what data we collect and how we use it, because we are committed to transparency and user choice."


80/20 Thinking's advisory group includes Jerry Fishenden, Microsoft UK's leading technology adviser, but has never included anyone from Google.


Privacy International has previously protested against other Google technology, such as Latitude, which allows users to see their friends' locations, and its advertising outfit Doubleclick. The campaign group submitted an in-depth letter of concern to the Information Commissioner's Office on Monday in relation to Street View.


The service, which was introduced in the UK last week, shows 360 degree images of streets from 25 British cities. Faces and car numberplates are supposed to be blurred out but in some cases can be seen. Users can complain to Google if they find images on Street View offensive. The images can usually be taken down within hours.


Mr Davies said Privacy International had received several hundred complaints about the service, mostly in relation to the failure of the blurring-out software. "I don't want Google punished and I don't want Street View removed," he said. "We'd be happy if Google just made a commitment to be more transparent and accountable. The current situation is not sustainable."


Microsoft declined to comment.

[Rossco]

If I see one of them goggle vans round my way I'm gonna wave my magic wand at em

but really nuff alredy ffs

[Ronski]

Is Google’s Street View really another invasion of privacy?
Belfgast Telegraph
By Darren Lemon
Tuesday, 31 March 2009


Privacy has been a major talking point on the web in the last few weeks.

For sheer volume of coverage, Google’s recently introduced Street View (http://maps.google. co.uk/help/maps/streetview) has to take the top prize.

The service aimed to give anyone with an internet connection a 360-degree view of almost any street in any major city. Instead, it gave Google a headache.

One man complained because the company’s cameras had caught him being sick in the street.

Another image showed a man leaving a sex shop. In a separate incident, two work colleagues were captured in a compromising encounter.

Privacy International (www.privacyinternational.org) subsequently made a formal complaint to the office of the Information Commissioner (www.ico.gov.uk).

Google’s defence is that it blurs faces and car registrations before placing images online. But opponents say it doesn’t go far enough.

Given the number of CCTV cameras on our streets, it would seem ironic that there’s a debate about this issue.

The key difference, however, is that anyone can have access to Google’s images while CCTV is restricted. In addition, while the street scenes may have upset some people, the fact that they are not focused on one individual passes the key legal test.

Another safeguard is that if you want your house removed from the service, you can click a link on its image and make an instant request to the company.

Privacy arguments aside, you can see why Street View holds a fascination for many people. You can “stroll� down Fifth Avenue in New York, visit the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC, or cross Sydney Harbour Bridge without leaving your living room.

As some bloggers have pointed out, the service is also surprisingly useful if you plan to travel to an unfamiliar city and need to know how to get to your hotel — or even know what your hotel looks like.

Interestingly, Street View has been operating in major American cities for some time now, without similar levels of complaint. And it may, in fact, turn out to be a short-lived controversy.

Remember how we all rushed to our computers to look at our houses when Google Earth launched? When was the last time you did that?

The other big privacy issue on the web has been the ad-serving system Webwise, run by a company called Phorm (www.phorm. com). Privacy campaigners have urged some of the biggest online firms, such as Amazon (www.amazon.co.uk) and eBay (www.ebay.co.uk), to refuse to use the service, which presents internet users with advertisements based on their browsing history.

Because Phorm doesn’t actually gather personally identifiable information, it was given the all-clear by the information commissioner last year.

This whole debate assumes greater importance because a couple of weeks ago, the man regarded as the inventor of the internet, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, warned that its integrity as a communications medium was under threat from “snooping� to gather sensitive data.

But every technological invention brings with it new concerns about privacy. The introduction of the telephone enabled wiretapping. The microphone enabled bugging. The television camera evolved into CCTV.

Our mobile phones betray our whereabouts with their signals to the nearest base station. Even the humble supermarket loyalty card tracks our shopping habits.

Most of the aforementioned technologies were around long before the internet. But it seems that if something is happening online, it becomes much more newsworthy.

It might also be connected with the hype that surrounds technology companies like Google. As the Croydon Advertiser reports, a site called Virtual Norwood (www.virtualnorwood.com/forum/index.php) does for one London borough what Google is now doing for the world’s major cities. It has now been running for a decade.

And, aside from a couple of minor concerns (such as a shop owner wondering if burglars could see the kind of locks he was using), it has survived unscathed — and with none of the blanket news coverage.

Darren Lemon is general manager of eircom NI (www.eircomni.co.uk). His email address is Darren.lemon@eircomni.co.uk.

[Ronski]

COMMENTS

Comment - Thumbs Up

How pathetic that some bloke is sick in the street and complains that Google Earth has captured the image. The streets are for us all and I personally would like to complain about him and his leftovers......did he clean it up I wonder?.......if sickness a result of illness and expected....carry a sick bag please.
And to the geezer leaving a sex shop.........does he really think that nobody will see him appart from Google earth....silly man. I think Google earth is absolutely marvelous and I look forward to seeing more of the planet... and the smiley face I am going to paint on my shed roof. Thank you Google Earth ... Love it
Posted by Beckie Dobson | 31.03.09, 12:23 GMT

Comment

They didn't blur my numberplate though which is silly because you could read the number i'm glad we got a new car Posted by name | 31.03.09, 13:49 GMT

Comment

I dont believe that it is because you are in public and the poparazi do it all the time. Besides if you dont have anything to hide then it shoudn't matter.

Posted by mel | 31.03.09, 16:15 GMT

Comment

I think the fuss is ridiculous over this. If you don't want to be seen doing something that's embarassing to you then don't do it in a public street. Posted by April | 01.04.09, 13:48 GMT