[AusNOG] Google creepier than Conroy?

[Bevan Slattery]

Agree Andrew.

B


Sent from my iPhone

On 30/05/2010, at 3:36 PM, "Andrew Cox" <andrew at accessplus.com.au>  
wrote:

> Everyone seems to be assuming the software was written for the express
> purpose of being uploaded to google streetview vehicles to capture
> information worldwide, when in reality for all we know the application
> used for the wireless capture may very well be part of the same
> software google uses to audit and security test its own networks hence
> it would make perfect sense for an option to capture traffic to be
> part of their software.
>
> It's all speculation on our part (mine as much as anyone else) and I
> don't think Conroy or any of us are really in a place to comment on
> how accidental this was. Leaving it to the courts and the proper
> authorities (hopefully authorities who *do* understand these things..
> unlike Conroy) to work it all out and make a decision.
>
> - Andrew
>
> On 30/05/2010, at 10:35 AM, Andrew Fort wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:32 AM,  <roland at chan.id.au> wrote:
>>> Even Conroy has a point here. He's pointed out that the collection
>>> software was not written by accident. At some point it was designed
>>> to do what has been done. It may have been accidentally turned on
>>> for the data collection drives, but at some point Google actually
>>> wanted to do this and constructed the capability to do so. I don't
>>> imagine that it's a bug, it has to be a feature.
>>
>> That was the subtext for me posting the article - when even Conroy  
>> has
>> a point, one really does need to stop and wonder.
>>
>> -a
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog