Frankly I'm surprised it's taken so long for someone to say it, but it seems self-evident that something like Google Maps is a very useful tool for a terrorist who wants to find detailed satellite imagery of targets. Now an Assemblyman from Queens New York has written to Google's CEO Eric Schmidt about the issue. This comes in the wake of news that the recent foiled plot to target pipelines in and around JFK airport was aided by satellite imagery from Google.
Clearly Google Maps is a great tool, and personally I'm using it more and more frequently as a replacement to StreetMap. However, in terms of the US satellite data it is certainly a goldmine of information for someone who wants to find decent targets for strategic purposes.
The question of course is how do you balance the benign purposes of the utility with the malicious? You could of course log access to the system and monitor in detail searches which could be considered as a typical search pattern of someone looking for things for the wrong reasons.
However, if you do that you could, and probably will, find yourself experiencing a large number of false positive hits. Google Maps, a bit like Wikipedia, has quite a community of users who spend all day looking at satellite imagery and finding all sort of weird and wonderful things. The resources that would be expended investigating every suspect action is potentially huge.
The solution is certainly not a simple one I think, but the argument by the Queens Assemblyman is not something that ought to be ignored either.
15 comments:
There is already a degree of state cenorship in Google Earth, Try looking at the Trident base in Faslane, Scotland. You will find that whilst the countryside around is fine and highly visible, the base itself - almost to the perimeter wire - is obscured. The daft thing is that there are public roads and a railway line going past it ! !
As with all things terrorist - it's easy to blow people up. The amazing thing is that generally people don't.
I should be watching this Code
Thank you very much
Are you talking about Street View on google maps? Or google earth?
Google Earth contains only images that are publicly available already they just put them in one place. Street View shows pictures that could easily be taken and accessed anyway.
Google Maps contains information that is easily available from OS maps before the internet existed and from many other sites on the internet.
Just because Google have presented publicly available information in an easily searched manner doesn't mean it needs to be monitored.
Do you really think there are hordes of "apathetic" terrorists who before couldn't be bothered to buy a map, get someone to take some reconaissance photos and grab the latest publicly available satellite imagery - but now it's on Google - hey why not blow something up, it's so much easier now???
Caroline, Google Map has satellite imagery
So wannabe terrorists in a-menace-stan will spend all day gazing at one Canada square. Doesn't mean they will actually try blowing it up.
I look at pictures of naked women all day. Doesn’t mean I’d actually go up to a woman and talk to her.
Caroline, you're point about buying a map etc is certainly valid. However, the Internet, by virtue of it being globally available, does certainly have the ability to aid someone who might not have an easily identifiable address, who perhaps doesn't want to find themself using a credit card to pruchase satellite imagery.
The question you have to ask yourself is whether certain potential strategic targets available to be seen in quite significant detail through the system should be so freely available.
This is not about restricting information about where certain things are, but more deciding what level of information about certain things you want to make easily accessible.
Do you really think there are hordes of "apathetic" terrorists who before couldn't be bothered to buy a map, get someone to take some reconaissance photos and grab the latest publicly available satellite imagery - but now it's on Google - hey why not blow something up, it's so much easier now???
Clearly I didn't say that, so no. What I do think though is that it considering the security implications of such things in light of the potential threat is not something that should simply be ignored.
As was pointed out above, there is already some examples of this happening - deliberately or not I do not know - and there seems a genuine security consideration on that point.
I shoudl also add that my "but what can be done?" question related specifcally to the difficultly of restricting the access to the imgery from a technological point of view.
Alright but nitpicking aside - if you feel it's a situation worth monitoring you must feel that at some point some sort of action should be taken. How do you do that without restricting the worlds access to fascinating resources that help our education and understanding? Or pinpointing innocent net surfers as international terrorists?
I didn't say it was a situation that I felt was worth monitoring. I actually said that such an undertaking with be a technological nightmare and would create too many false positives.
The most obvious thing is blurring potential strategic targets, like nuclear power stations, military taregts, oil pipelines etc. But not Madonna's house.
Never mind the terrorists, what about the burglars and robbers that now get a nice look at your home and garden so they can plan their crime properly?
The pictures taken are very detailed, you can tell if people have kids or pets, if they spent money on nice garden furniture and also, how to escape through the gardens the easiest way.
You sound like you've given this a lot of thought. Hangon asecond... did you just type that from the laptop in my house?
Why don’t Google follow the lead from the US department of homeland security on their form DS-156 and ask the user if they are up to no good or not?
The form asks:
"Do you seek to enter the United States to engage in export control violations, subversive or terrorist activities, or any other unlawful purpose? Are you a member or representative of a terrorist organization as currently designated by the U.S. Secretary of State? Have you ever participated in persecutions directed by the Nazi government of Germany; or have you ever participated in genocide?"
Google could so something similar; it works for the US Government.
Caroline said: "Just because Google have presented publicly available information in an easily searched manner..(snip)"
I am wondering why this information is publicly available in the first place? -- what can possibly be gained by exposing millions of people to crime this way?
Dizzy asks: "What can be done?"
Only allow people who have a professional and legal reason access to them. No-one needs recent satellite pictures to find a location -- a classic map is far better suited to this. Google (and whoever else) doesn't need to make them available to just anyone, just like a chemist may stock medical heroin but only sells it to those that have the correct prescription for it.
sorry cinnamon, I would engage in a protest if theytook my access to google maps/earth away. I love revisiting cities and places I used to live or visited as a tourist.
I think blurring of strategic locations is a good technicl compromise. That's what can be done. But "doing" things sounds like you have nanny tendancies...
Post a Comment