Slashdot Log In
Google Blurring Sensitive Map Information
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Jan 28, 2007 04:27 PM
from the blurring-the-nukes dept.
from the blurring-the-nukes dept.
Cyphoid writes "While viewing my school (the University of Massachusetts Lowell) with Google Maps, I noticed that a select portion of the campus was pixelated: the operational nuclear research facility on campus. Curious, I attempted to view the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant in Plymouth, Massachusetts. It too was pixelated. What or who is compelling Google to smudge out these images selectively? Will all satellite images of facilities that the government deems 'sensitive' soon be subject to censoring?" Not surprisingly, the same areas are blurred in Google Earth. But how about images from satellites operated by other nations, such as SPOT or Sovinformsputnik?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading ... Please wait.

MassGIS (Score:5, Informative)
I believe you will find they are the blurring culprits if you download the latest aerial photos done by a 2005 fly by.
Re:MassGIS (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MassGIS (Score:4, Informative)
Re:MassGIS (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A coal powered plant [google.com] in Cartersvile, Georgia is the same way.
Lewiston, ME: See for yourself. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MassGIS (Score:4, Informative)
Great (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
details for you (Score:5, Informative)
It's a really lame little plant, with barely any fuel. The white thing is a metal containment dome, attached to a 3-story or 4-story research building. It's about 4 stories tall. They give tours; you can look down into a pool of water to see the glowing blue core. It's called the Pinanski Energy Center.
Attacking this plant would do nothing of any real interest, though some idiots would surely freak out. The radiation source is deep below ground and really weak.
Most of the obscured area is just a parking lot. The research building extends to the northwest of the white reactor; they are attached. The area to the southwest is a parking lot for that building and the adjacent ones. The area to the northeast is a parking lot for the gym, which you can see with the white rectangle on the roof. The farthest west obscured area is a pedestrian overpass at the 3rd-floor level that runs between two unrelated buildings, the physics building (north) and engineering building (south). Most everything in the area is 4-story.
There are far more interesting things on campus that a person could attack, starting with the dorms!
You can find pictures on the web, including a lame attack by ABC news.
http://www.uml.edu/maps/pinanski.htm [uml.edu]
http://www.uml.edu/student-services/disability/ad
http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LooseNukes/story?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Great (Score:4, Funny)
A blur is almost as good as a bullseye (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A blur is almost as good as a bullseye (Score:5, Interesting)
It brings up an interesting point. Now terrorists can use an algorithm to look for fuzzy areas, and will know they are of interest. If you want Al Quida to nail your enemy, then just put a fuzzy tarp on his/her roof.
Killer Blobs, Run! (Score:5, Funny)
dont blame Google. (Score:5, Funny)
Have you ever been there? That's how it looks! I think they built it out of Lego.
Dunno these places seem fine (Score:4, Interesting)
Dumb (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dumb (Score:4, Insightful)
I am just curious how many terrorist attacs are done with the help of Google Earth. And even IF it would work as stated, it would only divert the attack to a different place. Just like a good lock on your door will prevent a burgelary in your house, yet is does not prevent the robber going to your neighbours house.
I wonder what will happen if somebody still blows up the place. Will it be obvious that blurring does not work, or will the blurring be extended to schools in general to protect the children because of terrorism? Well, not so much wonder as be afraid of the answer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You think the US is bad, try Japan. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You think the US is bad, try Japan. (Score:5, Funny)
No kidding. That's why I stopped browsing Japanese porn.
Old news, really! They did this when Kodak sold.. (Score:5, Interesting)
The original maps were bought from Keyhole, a company that Kodak used to own. In the past they only offered LandSat imagery of all Kodak buildings (15 meter), but now they've just gone to the original 1 meter and simply kerneled it. It's EXTREMELY easy to see here- check out the parking lots.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=14616&ie=
I have found it to be a bit annoying as I use features around the airport for identification for my work, and it was always nice to have an outside 'reference' which might or might not agree with the GPS solution.
And why would Kodak care about providing high resolution targetting information of their infrastructure to competitors, not including the 10,000 gallon tanks of various hydrocarbon solvents that are stored near the center of the complex so that, should an explosion occurr, the buildings themselves will buffer 80% of the immediate damage and pressure wave to prevent wanton death and destruction?
For 'sensitive' areas it's not much to ask.
Oh, and btw- No problem seeing 1m resolution here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&z=19&ll=38.88
My point? It's not that tough to get high resolution CQQs from your local state bureau. The county mosaics are high resolution and flown 2x per year by the USDA.
Re:Old news, really! They did this when Kodak sold (Score:5, Insightful)
For every "terrorist use" there are thousands or more productive uses like yours. Blurring it out only serves to make people's jobs harder and is thus a drag on the economy.
That's terrorism. Miminal threats that cause out of proportion reactions that themselves cause more damage than than any direct terrorist action.
Opting out my house (Score:5, Funny)
Sensitive areas (Score:5, Funny)
boston gas tanks blurred (Score:2)
pulled up google maps and there it is in its pixelated glory.
Gas tank art all pixelated [google.com]
Other nuclear plants unblurred... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&om=1&z=16&ll=44.6
To the lower left, you can even see the waste storage containers. If you look closely, you can even see the machine gun nests. Incidentally, I visited this facility as part of a physics trip back in my undergrad years, before 9-11. I don't know if they allow visitors anymore.
Also, the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant unblurred.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=1899+CR-7
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Somebody Knows What They're Doing (Score:3, Interesting)
Headless Chicken Homeland Security (Score:3, Funny)
> But how about images from satellites operated by other nations,
> such as SPOT or Sovinformsputnik?
Don't worry! Everyone knows Osama only use Google Earth. He's still boycotting Sovinformsputnik over of the Soviet Invasion of Aghanistan (Go Taliban!), and said he wouldn't be caught dead using SPOT.
Sovinformsputnik? (Score:3, Interesting)
For instance, their sample page World Trade Center [sovinformsputnik.com]. "These twin towers dominate the skyline by their height and the clearness of their lines. Currently it is the center for nearly every phase of international business...."
So not really a real-time database.
Let's launch our own recon satellite! (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously. HAM operators have already launched radio relay satellites in the past; and there's nothing preventing us from doing something similar as a grassroots movement. We may even be able to read some imagery in real-time. By licensing the image stream and database similarly to Wikipedia (cc-by-sa, gfdl, ...) we'd stay true to our open source credo and spirit. Much better than the crippleware commercial offerings of Google and others anyway! Competition and verifiability will keep them honest as well.
Let's just make sure to have the main satellite operation center and a few relays in countries that don't promote censorship; perhaps on a pacific island, in a desert etc... Oh, and a few reflecting surfaces and other defensive means to protect against chinese killer satellites would be a good idea too.
Financing this is would also be quite easy, I suppose. How about selling news agencies and TV networks priority slots to cover a regional crisis, wars and other events in near-real time; something they won't get from commercial operators even for big bucks?
Once Upon a Time.... (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a difference in degree, but not much else.
Welcome to the Brave New World, kids, and the best part about it is that we did it all to ourselves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simcurity (Score:4, Insightful)
Or buying images from a third-party that has already blurred them out, which is very likely the actual case.
Re:Simcurity (Score:5, Insightful)
So you're saying we should pay no attention to the simplest and easiest of security measures because a potential adversary could take more agressive action. That's like saying it's okay to have a sticky note with the root password on a critical server as long as you keep the firewall updated.
"Years-old databases"? It's not like the design of a nuclear power plant changes on a day-to-day basis.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course governments are plotting to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The real one is several miles away and uses an active camouflage bubble to hide itself.
Crap, am I posting from an unsecured lo
Say What? (Score:4, Informative)
The Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] does not mention media caused American deaths but it does tell us that of the 147 American deaths, 41 (28%) were killed by either friendly-fire or allied munitions. The Wikipedia does report [wikipedia.org]: It seems to me that the lack of troop movement information caused more American deaths than any CNN news reports. It also appears that you've been taken in by anti-free-press FUD that was used as an excuse to even further curtail objective reporting in the current Gulf War. But if you have credible evidence to the contrary, please share it with us.
On the other hand, I agree with you that it is probably a good idea for Google Earth to be blurry around nuke plants.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)