Google Earth: Aiding terrorists?
A petition before an Indian court is asking for a ban on Google Earth after allegations emerged that terrorists who stormed Mumbai last month may have used online satellite imaging to orchestrate the attack. One Indian official is also urging the Bombay High Court to require that Google blur images of sensitive areas in the country until the case is decided.
Police in Mumbai have said the terrorists familiarised themselves with the streets of Mumbai’s financial capital using satellite images, according to the sole gunman to be captured alive. The commandos who stormed the Taj Mahal Palace hotel in Mumbai said the militants had made a beeline for the building’s CCTV control room.
The legal petition also follows unconfirmed reports that Faheem Ahmed Ansari, a suspected militant who was arrested in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh in February, said he was shown maps of Indian locations on Google Earth by members of Lashkar-e-Taiber, the Pakistan-based terrorist faction that Indian officials are convinced was behind the Mumbai attacks.
India is not alone in its concerns about the detailed satellite imaging available through the search engine giant’s website. Security agencies have long warned that terrorists could use the wealth of data on Google Earth to plan attacks. In light of such potential security risks, should Google Earth be required to limit the scope of such data?




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top29 Comments to “Google Earth: Aiding terrorists?”
And lets:
- eliminate the GPS system since it was used by the 9/11 trerror
- eliminate cell phones cine they are used to coordinate crime
- eliminate the internet since it is used to coordiante crime and terrorism
- eliminate all vehicle so there are no car bombs
and one can continue.
This is just downright silly.
Report comment to moderator
I was waiting for this to happen. I agree with Musing.
Report comment to moderator
Sometimes Musing and I agree.
Google Earth does reduce the resolution on some sites. I tried to visit Thule air base where I used to fly to in 1951. Given that it has obviously changed, I still can’t identify some landmarks that I remember.
It would be impossible to control every potential terrorist site.
Report comment to moderator
And Maps, let’s ban maps.
Report comment to moderator
Well and good, but does Google maps need to post photos of my house, with my address, without my permission?
Who wants to see my dog barking on the deck?
My county has been up in arms about this for a couple months now. It’s the detail that bothers us.
Report comment to moderator
Red letter day! Except for typos, I agree one hundred percent with Musing.
Report comment to moderator
A picture can be used for good, or it can be used for evil. A political office can be used for good, or for evil. A gun can be used for good, or for evil. A rock can be used for good, for evil. Did that rock pick itself up and smash the skull of Abel? Do guns animate themselves and pull their own trigger? Does the word ‘governor’ make itself rich by selling its power to the highest bidder? Do pictures kill innocents? Where does the regulation end? Make way for more regulation!
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, pretty common sense.
Here is a novel idea though. Use google earth to secure your security weak points. DUH.
Although Michelle makes an interesting point. Google has allowed for street level photos. However, I think the local photos are local residents uploading pictures of their streets. I cant see google sending out teams to do this. I doubt there are that many in India at this point.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
A few months ago someone showed me how to use Google Earth and another similar service from another company, and I eagerly tried to find my own neighborhood. But it turns out they don’t have anything at street level where I live. The closest I can get is an image of four square miles of our part of town, with a green blob over the whole area where I live – I guess we have a lot of trees in our neighborhood.
Report comment to moderator
As others have already noted-it seems the comments of a certain blogger are more interesting than the original subject matter.
I may have to start reading his/her comments again, instead of just skipping them.
The word “silly” was really used!!! Gotta love it
Report comment to moderator
” Google has allowed for street level photos. However, I think the local photos are local residents uploading pictures of their streets.”
The street-level view in Google Maps (I assume it is the same in Google Earth) was captured by a car or van with one of those 360-degree cameras on the roof. You can see the shadow of the car in some of the shots.
But it is a static view, not live. No one sees what you are up to. Unless you happened to be standing out on your front lawn at the time doing something that would embarrass you, in which case WHY were you doing that on your front lawn?
Unless you live on a private street, it seems to me like the view from the middle of the road is pretty much public. It’s available to anyone interested enough to go to your street and look around. This just makes it far easier to do that.
Chas nails it, though, as does Musing. Really sensitive areas do get blurred, and there aren’t street level views driving through military bases.
Report comment to moderator
Often the pictures are several years old. It is only slightly more work for a terrorist to go and take the pictures himself. So Google earth saves him a little time. It usually does provide any information that is not already publicly accessible (unless the picture is of a restricted area).
Report comment to moderator
Looks like we all agree, across the board.
Banning Gogle Earth or Google Map satellite images will accomplish little or nothing. If a terrorist can’t get this stuff from Google Earth/Map, he can just grab his camera and drive by — or rent a helicopter or plane, if necessary.
This is the place where the libertarian in me screams out against excessive government meddling.
(BTW, Mark Roth [#9] is that what you mean by your post?)
Report comment to moderator
The complaint in our county is “they” were driving onto private lands, past “do not trespass” signs and taking photos which were then posted. The set up was just as Thomas described.
Google maps, though, aren’t the only ones. Zillow.com can show you angles of the house from above and all four directions, including street level. You then can click on a handy link and find out how much I paid in property tax, what the size of my house is, how many bedrooms and so forth. The photos may be a year or two old, but it bothers me how readily anyone can get information like this.
Sure, they always could have gone down to the county assessors offices, but how often would that have been done? And if someone went in and asked about all the houses on my street, wouldn’t someone at the office had gotten suspicious? This way anyone with a computer can access information about my home, and conjecture information about me and what I might own as a result.
Fortunately, I have a barking dog on the deck–see photo.
I come from the “why make it any easier?” crowd.
Report comment to moderator
There is also the issue of India’s demand to ban.
Can India require a foreign-owned company to follow its laws when taht co. provides an internet service? Seems that if India wants Google Earth banned, it should filter it just for India. (Apparently the technology is available…China filters lots of info.)
India should not be able to decide what’s available outside of India.
(Please tell me that Google is not based in India…)
Report comment to moderator
Modern county assessors offices already make this information available online. I can go to my county website and pull up a list of all the houses on my block. Each house number is a hyper link to the detail information for that house. Mortgages are also a matter of public record, and are searchable online.
A company I used to work for purchased each months mortgage filings electronically, and used them to try and assess their share of originations in the county.
Business “DBA” filings are public records as well. My wife and I ran a small business, and we targeted start-ups who might need business cards, logos, etc. We got the listings out of the local “Business First” paper, but they were dated. We got them from the county on floppy disk each month – much fresher, and they could be imported into our database and generate letters automatically.
Efficient easy access to public information is VERY important to businesses large and small. Modernized access at the county level has been an incredible investment by local governments, helping their local businesses. Also, businesses pay for this ease of access in many cases, either by registering or paying for each download or data dump. This has helped pay for the technology, and in many cases offset the costs of legally mandated recording of public information.
Report comment to moderator
Michelle: By virtue of the fact that you participate here, SOMEBODY (and you don’t really know who) can fairly easily determine who you are, who’s in your family, and what your philosophy on government, religion, guns, and a variety of personal behaviours is.
Respectfully, you have long since in this way given up much more private and personal information than what the outside of your home looks like.
Momoffive: Google is not owned by the Indian government, nor is much of their work done in India. Yet. But the VERY REAL issue your post brings up is, What happens if they are or do? If a “sovereign wealth fund” or foreign government controlled corporation were to acquire Google or Microsoft or any of hundreds of other vital information providers, would they then follow the dictates of their new sovereign? If they then provided detailed photos of our military bases or government buildings could we or should we stop them? If they directed searches to sites of their choosing, what would happen?
Information has always been power, and in the “information age” this is much more true than in the past.
Report comment to moderator
So, Google is too big to fail OR sell?
Seriously, seems we have a whole new industry that we need to make sure we stay attractive to.
Does our tax policy treat internet companies well? (My educated guess would be no, and that it will get less attractive with the coming administration.)
Corporations will maximize profit, and if that’s bigger in India (obviously), to Inia they will go.
We need to make our tax policy more corporate-friendly. I like the Fair Tax.
Report comment to moderator
Of course the very wise Musing is correct….
Report comment to moderator
I never agree with Musing…except this time.
I think this is in the same category as the whole national Internet filter thing too.
There are MANY things that we can potentially limit in order to be more secure, but we also then lose a great deal of freedom in the process.
With freedom comes responsibility, so some self-policing by Google is warranted in obvious instances, but Google has the right to create its maps.
Report comment to moderator
#18
Arcadia,
You ask some excellent questions. They are worth addressing. I hope some of those who actually can do something about these things are asking the same questions.
Report comment to moderator
I largely agree with TRS?!?
Report comment to moderator
Some old nautical maps would indicate: Here be monsters to indicate where dragons and other fearsome creatures of the deep might lurk.
Perhaps Google Maps should overlay this phrase on their maps.
Report comment to moderator
You could create such a thing and market it in your retirement…what a fun, quirky sense of humor!
Report comment to moderator
And perhaps a valuable public service, as well.
Report comment to moderator
Sigh, I expect you’re all correct.
Well, the dog biscuits are kept to the right of the sink . . .
Report comment to moderator
Gummint gets all the info on us. “No problem … it’s for our own good.”
But we don’t get no info.
Right on, Musing (1).
Report comment to moderator
Dang. What now? A topic almost everyone agrees on. Kind of tempts me to take the contrary position just to be ornery, y’know?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!