Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal issued a press release today claiming to head a multi-state investigation into Google’s collection of data over WiFi networks.
But, when I asked his staff (Blumenthal is in hiding from the press, hoping to avoid questions about his false Vietnam service claims) to provide me with a list of states or the number of states that have asked him to head his investigation, they were unable to name one.
“A number of states have joined our multistate investigation of Google. We expect additional states to commit in the coming days and weeks. We will provide more information next week regarding states joining our investigation,” was the written answer I received a couple of hours after I asked.
I filed an FOI request this afternoon demanding all documents of other states seeking to join this investigation. I have a hunch that Blumenthal may have been caught in another “misspeak,” or as I prefer to call it “misstate.”
Interestingly enough, in another press release today, Blumenthal names the states he is working with on another issue:
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today, joining attorneys general from 10 other Atlantic Coast states, sent letters to BP and its affiliated companies as a first step to protect Connecticut’s interests from the potential effects of the oil spill.
Blumenthal said that even if it is unlikely that oil will actually reach the Connecticut shoreline, there remains a threat that wildlife — including injured or sick migratory birds that spend part of their life in Gulf area waters before heading north — could be severely impacted.
Participating states include Maryland, Delaware, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina
The following is his full press release from earlier in the day on Google:
ATTORNEY GENERAL TO LEAD MULTISTATE INVESTIGATION OF
GOOGLE’S UNAUTHORIZED COLLECTION OF DATA BROADCAST
OVER WIFI NETWORKS
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal announced today that his office will lead a multistate investigation into Google Street View cars’ unauthorized collection of personal data from wireless computer networks and that he is seeking additional information about the practice in Connecticut.
Blumenthal said he expects a significant number of states to participate in the investigation. More than 30 states participated in a recent conference call regarding our investigation.
“My office will lead a multistate investigation — expected to involve a significant number of states — into Google’s deeply disturbing invasion of personal privacy,” Blumenthal said. “Street View cannot mean Complete View —
invading home and business computer networks and vacuuming up personal information and communications. Consumers have a right and a need to know what personal information — which could include emails, web browsing and passwords — Google may have collected, how and why. Google must come clean,
explaining how and why it intercepted and saved private information broadcast over personal and business wireless networks.
“While we hope Google will continue to cooperate, its response so far
raises as many questions as it answers. The company must provide a complete and comprehensive explanation of how this unauthorized data collection
happened, why the information was kept if collection was inadvertent and what action will prevent a recurrence.
“Our investigation will consider whether laws may have been broken and whether changes to state and federal statutes may be necessary.”
Blumenthal also announced that his office has asked Google for additional information and explanation in the wake of the company’s response to his office earlier this month. His questions include:
• Was data collected by Google ever extracted and if so, when and why;
• How did purportedly unauthorized code — which captured data broadcast over unencrypted WiFi networks — become part of a Street View computer program;
• Who inserted what Google calls unauthorized code into the program and why;
• Have there been other instances of engineers writing unauthorized code into Google products to capture consumer data, and if so provide all instances and full details;
• Why did Google save data it says was accidently collected.
In addition, Blumenthal’s office is awaiting information from Google in response to his original May 27 letter, including Connecticut towns and cities in which it collected unauthorized data, when it did so and how many state networks it pulled information from.
“Google needs to describe how code that intercepted and collected unencrypted data transmitted over WiFi networks was inserted into its software,” Blumenthal said. “We want to know who did this, why and how and when Google discovered it. Another concern is whether the data was accessed in any way by Google and if so when and why.”
Blumenthal’s letter seeks and asks also:
• For copies of the company’s internal procedures and protocols for Street View cars and data collected by them;
• What steps Google has taken to keep unauthorized code out of its products in the future;
• Whether Google conducted internal or external audits, analysis or performance reviews of its Street View program and data collected;
• How and when Google learned that its Street View cars were capturing data sent over unencrypted networks;
• Why Google Street View cars recorded the signal strength and quality of personal and business wireless networks.
The Street View vehicles are moving so they are not would only have a few seconds to gather anything off of a Wi-Fi signal before they are out of range. That’s barely long enough to determine the name of a network and its signal strength. It is unlikely to obtain a complete message because any data sent over a network or the Internet is broken into many small packets of information. Blumengidiot is seeking to set a legal precedent because this is still a gray area. An unencrypted Wi-Fi signal means no effort was made to protect what anybody in the area could access. Any laptop will show a similar list of Wi-Fi networks withing range.
Often existing software programs are modified with some features added or removed. iTunes was originally a program called Sound Jam with abilities such as changing it’s appearance disabled but were still in its code if one was to look.
I agree with Dot. If the signal is unsecured and transmitted out into open public space (the street), its no different than someone playing music in their house with the windows open. Anyone walking down the sidewalk would hear it. Are they too guilty of eavesdropping??? Better yet, the standard has always been “Is there an expectation of privacy?” Obviously not on an unsecured wifi.
Bloomie is an idiot and a camera hound. He lied about being in combat to inflate his already huge ego. Now he jumps the gun and announces being point man on a multi-state investigation about nothing. Only problem is there is no one in his group and he is a point man of one. A real legend in his own mind. What an imbecile.
Such brilliant commentary from the tea drinkers I’m sure. The first poster at least tried to make some sense, the second lost all credibility with the name calling.
Of course both of you would I’m sure be incensed if it was YOUR data they were capturing , and yes, even encrypted data can be collected. Did you know Google is also being investigated for capturing passwords too? Does it not bother either of you that a commercial entity is roaming the streets trying to gather data that will be used (and sold to others by the way) for commercial purposes without your consent?
Oh wait, this is RB’s fault of course. Led by the biased, slanted journalism we’ve come to expect from the stories author, I’m not surprised at the level of commentary from the repliers here. Here’s a crazy idea, how about we wait to see a list of other states before we all jump around like fools here. I know that doesn’t get the page hits that snarky leading stories do, but please.
Oh, and where is all the righteous indignation on McMahon’s lying about her resume ?
By sending anything over a Wi-Fi signal, one has essentially smashed it in the middle of the road and available to ail to pick up a small part of it. The data would not even be complete since it is broken up into pieces as small as 4 digits and often the order is scrambled. The average password is 6 characters long so less than 20 digits out of the millions of bits of information you sent or received over a wireless connection are in the passwords we use. A picture literally is a thousand words since a simple image such as the ctwatchdog logo on this website is 5278 bits of information. Lets say the Street View car just happened to drive by your house at the split second you typed your password with the password being contained in only one data packet. The chances of all of that happening at the same time are pretty slim, isn’t it?
I tend to use logic in analyzing a situation or problem instead of being tied to one ideology. Kool-Ade from one group or tea bags from another will flavor your views.
Even though I’ve criticized him, too much has been made of his military service. A family member active in veteran’s affairs and was actually at the event in question heard Blumingidiot making it clear in the context of the entire speech that his service was not in Vietnam but during the conflict. The military service clip was taken out of context, he correctly stated it both before and after the section McMahon is promoting. This is only an issue because Linda wants to make it an issue.
I simply don’t like the way that Blumingidiot likes to grandstand at press conferences on exaggerated issues where he often had his facts wrong such as his claims about Myspace and Facebook.
http://nhregister.com/articles/2009/02/03/opinion/doc4988246ef2214100705943.txt
Blumingidiot is a sleazy lawyer similar to an ambulance chaser, and Linda is a sleazy showbiz promoter similar to P.T. Barnum. This November, my vote goes to Nunno DeBove.