Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 22nd May 2010 21:18 UTC
Permalink for comment 426110
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-05-26
They could have any data that was currently being transmitted over the network while it was being scanned, but if Google's telling the truth then there couldn't be much data picked up in that 1/5th of a second. Especially because I'd bet that most/all unsecured wireless networks only carry web surfing data and lie idle 99% of the time.
I'd agree that it's a bit of a non-event, especially since Google has freely admitted what has happened (rather than there being a whistleblower).
Receiving unencrypted radio signals is, most likely, not illegal, as long as you're on public property or your own property. Transmitting data would imply use of someone else's network without their permission, which is probably illegal. But Google only received, did not transmit.