Google is paying big bucks in fines for data mining from 'google earth' mapping and siphoning data from 'unsecured' WiFi connections.
That accusation was generated by Microsoft and Apple (both of which did the same or similar things), AND, it is entirely bogus. Here's why: wifi's operate at several fixed bandwidths, which vary from Tier I at 1.25 Mb/s to the average in the US, which is about 8 Mb/sec. The Google Street View cars usually travel at around 25 mph, which is about 37 feet per second. The average wifi device has a 3 to 6" antenna and transmits at a power of between 75 and 250 mw, which is the maximum. Usually it is factory set to about 125 mw or less. Some manufacturers allow you to set the power of the transmitter through their html admin page. but some do not. Assuming full power the average range of a wifi is 300 feet, or a diameter of 600 feet. The Google Street View car will traverse that 600 feet in about 16 seconds. During that time they will intercept, for the 8mb/s connections, 128 mb of data. You may think that is a lot, but it is not, because most of that data is HTML markup language and the IPv4 IP (internet protocol). The average IP packet is around 1460 bytes (the max ethernet packet size is 1,500 bytes). Depending on the various and optional flags which can be set the actual data that an IP packet carries can be less than 1,200 bytes.
Now, while you are browsing this web page (this one, the one you are reading now) right mouse on an empty part of the page and select "View Page Source". FireFox readers may have to use a menu option to see the "view source" option. What you see when you open that source page is what is called HTML code, short for HyperText Markup Language. It is how web pages are encoded so that your browser can make sense of them and display them properly. Notice that the actual text is much less, on most web pages, than the code which makes up the frames, windows, graphics, links, etc.... So, while what I have written up to this point is about 1,500 letters (1 byte per letter), the source code you are looking at can be 10x as much, or more. IOW, of that 128 mb of data there is probably less than 10 or 12 mb of actual information. But, that much info is transmitted only if one is in a "download" mode. Most people set on a web page, reading it, like you are doing here. Were Google to intercept you and take less only 16 seconds the most they'd get is this web page, which is public information anyway, including the IP address of the NFOA website, which is public.
They'd also get your wifi ESSID (name) and your IP address, but both of those are public as well. And, while they are moving they are recording GPS data so they will be able to match your ESSID with a specific location. However, THAT TOO is public information. Most internet users are using a dynamic internet connection, which means your ISP can give you a different IP address every time your lease expires and your WIFI device negotiates with your ISP for a new least, which usually means a new IP address. So, the specific IP address you use at any given time is meaningless because it may be given to someone else the next day. IF you are running an encrypted connection (using TOR or something similar) then Google gets no information or HTML data of what's on the pages you browse, or where you browse.
Basically, the Federal government, at the bequest of Microsoft and Apple, got the FCC to investigate, but the FCC found nothing, which they admitted a couple months ago. But, they needed to recoup the costs of the investigation so they did what is easy to do for any federal regulatory agency to do, find some obscure reg and squeeze some cash out of Google. They know it will be more economical for Google to pay the measly fine than to pay a bunch of lawyers for several years fighting it. Microsoft is using that tactic, which depends on their financial clout and an NDA, to extort cash from device vendors that are using Android to power their smartphones. MS has made more money by extortion than they have by selling WinPhone8 or Win8. We wouldn't have known about this because of the NDA's, but Barnes & Noble refused to sign the NDA and then blew the whistle on how they operated.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111109/02574116691/barnes-noble-claims-that-microsoft-patent-shakedown-over-android-is-antitrust-violation.shtmlMicrosoft is using "Bing" to compete against Goggle's search engine. But, they were caught using Bing as a wrapper for Google searches!
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/microsofts-bing-uses-google-search.htmland apparently they still were last fall:
http://www.webpronews.com/cutts-last-time-i-checked-bing-was-still-using-google-as-a-signal-2012-09What about Apple? Most of you are familiar with Apple's map/gps fiasco last fall when drivers following Apple's GPS data drove into lakes and one even took a wrong turn into a seedy part of a town and experienced events that called for a CCW. Just Google "Apple GPS problems"
Essentially all that Google was doing with Street View cars, besides photographing the environment from a public street, was matching up ESSID names with GPS data, for all the good that will do them. You can change your ESSID any time with little effort. Their big thing, then, was to match geographic locations with actual photographs taken at the street level. If Microsoft or Apple are showing you the same thing they are using Googles photos.
But, Apple did something much worse than anything Google did: they tracked your comings and goings using the GPS data in your iPhone!
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2383943,00.asp and they shared it with police on more than one occasion. Of course, PC Mag gets ad revenue from Apple so they softened the full impact of that tracking. Others were less charitable and explain why it matters, if you don't already understand:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/04/how-apple-tracks-your-location-without-your-consent-and-why-it-matters/
