Google Inc.’s been busy this week, mapping Mars, diving under the ocean and so on and so forth. But the new Google Latitude application has sparked the most buzz -- and controversy.
Latitude lets you track people’s locations -- or at least, their mobile phones’ locations --on a cute color layout, displaying headshots on little markers that overlay a Google map viewable on a handset of computer. While particularly useful for parents, employers with fleet businesses and suspicious spouses, the app also appeals to the social networking generation and those trying to meet up for cocktails.
It also offers one-click access to contact the people being traced via SMS, Gmail or Google Talk, so expect a flood of messages of this nature: “OMG are you at Macy’s right now??” Or less happily, “you said you were going out for milk, but it looks like you’re at the Elbow Room instead, you jerk!”
Latitude is simple to use: Just download and install the app on any device that supports Google Maps for Mobile v3.0 and above, including the T-Mobile USA G1, most color BlackBerry devices, Windows Mobile 5.0 and above devices, and Symbian S60 devices. Then opt in and select who can be a “follower.”
Sounds good, but despite the opt-in nature, privacy groups are concerned that Latitude is a step towards a 1984-style reality of constant surveillance.
"Many people will see Latitude as a cool product, but the reality is that Google has yet again failed to deliver strong privacy and security," said Simon Davies, director of London-based Privacy International. "The company has a long way to go before it can capture the trust of phone users. As it stands right now, Latitude could be a gift to stalkers, prying employers, jealous partners and obsessive friends. The dangers to a user's privacy and security are as limitless as the imagination of those who would abuse this technology."
And therein lies a good point. While users need to consent to the installation of the application on their phone, there’s no way of verifying that the person doing the consenting is actually the phone’s owner. It would be easy to nick someone’s handset and install the app without his or her knowledge. And with the exception of the BlackBerry version, the application doesn’t tell you that it’s running.
And so even though it’s possible to block someone you’ve added as a follower from viewing your location at any given time, it’s easy to forget the application is running in the first place.
Another danger with “location sharing” is of course the potential Facebook/MySpace integration -- in that instance your location isn’t just known by those you’ve let follow you, but also by your entire extended social network of friends of friends of friends, some of whom might not be the kind of folk you want knowing your physical location.
All of these are real concerns, but ultimately the question to ask is, is this Google’s problem? Or do users simply use the application — or misuse it — with the knowledge of the risks? To what extent should Google make users aware of these risks?
Google has been loathe to offer a comprehensive privacy policy, and no wonder: Its entire business model is based on collecting user data to serve up relevant ads. And at times this fact has verged into the realm of the creepy. In Gmail for instance, ads are selected for a user based on the content of the e-mail.
However, Google claims that it is not storing location information from Latitude, merely passing the data along at any given moment to allow phone tracking. Data that then disappears into the ether once it’s served its purpose, Google says.
