I am flattered to see that you all are reading and responding in part to my posts, in particular, my post:
and this approximate location is geocoded and sent back to the user’s device.The location server then uses the geocoded locations associated with visible MAC address to triangulate the approximate location of the user.The location server compares the MAC addresses seen by the user’s device with its list of known MAC addresses, and identifies associated geocoded locations (i.e.The user’s device sends a request to the Google location server with a list of MAC addresses which are currently visible to the device.Google location based services using WiFi access point data work as follows: GPS is also expensive in terms of battery consumption, so another reason to use WiFi location versus GPS is to conserve energy.
Blacklist mac address in erpoe plus#
Plus many devices don’t have GPS enabled. when there is no view of the sky when blocked by tall buildings). Yes-but it can be much slower or not available (e.g. At no point does Google publicly disclose MAC addresses from its database (in contrast with some other providers in Germany and elsewhere).īut wouldn’t GPS enable you to do to all this without collecting the additional data? Yes-but the only data which Google discloses to third parties through our Geo Location API is a triangulated geo code, which is an approximate location of the user’s device derived from all location data known about that point. Similarly, users of sites like Twitter can use location based services to add a geo location to give greater context to their messages. For example, users of Google Maps for Mobile can turn on “My Location” to identify their approximate location based on cell towers and WiFi access points which are visible to their device. The data which we collect is used to improve Google’s location based services, as well as services provided by the Google Geo Location API. However, it’s clear with hindsight that greater transparency would have been better. Given it was unrelated to Street View, that it is accessible to any WiFi-enabled device and that other companies already collect it, we did not think it was necessary. Why did you not tell the DPAs that you were collecting WiFi network information? Companies like Skyhook have been collecting this data cross Europe for longer than Google, as well as organizations like the German Fraunhofer Institute. We do not believe it is illegal-this is all publicly broadcast information which is accessible to anyone with a WiFi-enabled device.
Is it, as the German DPA states, illegal to collect WiFi network information? However, we do not collect any information about householders, we cannot identify an individual from the location data Google collects via its Street View cars. And SSIDs are often just the name of the router manufacturer or ISP with numbers and letters added, though some people do also personalize them. MAC addresses are a simple hardware ID assigned by the manufacturer. Networks also send information to other computers that are using the network, called payload data, but Google does not collect or store payload data.*īut doesn’t this information identify people? the network name) and MAC address (a unique number given to a device like a WiFi router). WiFi networks broadcast information that identifies the network and how that network operates.
0 kommentar(er)
