Virtual mapping programs have garnered some criticism from those who believe they might be adequate tools for terrorists staking out U.S. landmarks, but there is little the government can do to prevent publication of these images, according to the federal agency that handles satellite photography.
Microsoft this week announced the addition of street-by-street 3D imaging of several U.S. and international cities to its Live Search Maps program. Users can opt to view detailed, computer-generated images of landmarks like the Statue of Liberty and Central Park or just zoom in on their office or apartment building.
Google has a similar offering with its Google Earth program. But the search engine giant this week also added a "street view" option to its Web-based Google Maps offering that provides users with an actual photograph of the address they have just queried. Microsoft's existing "LiveDrive" beta mapping program has offered a similar feature since last year.
There are no federal guidelines to which companies like Microsoft or Google must adhere before the release of programs like Microsoft's Live Search Maps, Google Earth or Google Street Views, said Dave Burpee, a public affairs officer with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA). A Department of Homeland Security
spokesperson said the agency does not handle Internet mapping issues.
Burpee stressed that the NGA is "very much on the side of openness" and would not deign to tell Microsoft and Google how to operate their businesses.
But Burpee did acknowledge that "in a perfect world, for the support and defense of U.S. troops, it would be better if that [detailed imagery] wasn't there." But NGA does not "have the legal authority" to demand that the companies pull down mapping information, he added.
"Even if we wanted to do something about it, we couldn't," Burpee said.
Much of the satellite imagery used by such programs comes from international companies over which U.S. agencies have no jurisdiction, he said. The largest U.S.-based satellite imagery companies are Colorado-based Digital Globe and Virginia-based GeoEye. "The rest are all foreign," he said.
Lance Ulanoff agrees with Burpee. Read why here.
NGA is instead focused on supporting commercial remote-sensing satellite companies through the purchase of imagery, Burpee said. "Over the last five years, we've got $1.5 billion invested in acquiring imagery and helping [GeoEye and Digital Globe] launch the next generation of commercial satellites."
"If you look at this in context, this has been going on for a long time," Burpee said. "Classified satellites for nations hostile to the U.S. have been up there" long before these mapping programs were released. "Operational security is something we've had to deal with" for years. The Internet has just heightened awareness, he said.
On the off-chance that these mapping programs did prove that "there were some imminent American lives in danger and there was something we could do about it, we should try," Burpee said.
It would be somewhat of a bureaucratic nightmare to do so, however, he said. NGA would likely contact the
Commerce Department, which has the authority to order satellite operators to avoid certain areas. But image removal "still leaves a couple dozen others out there free to take pictures and disseminate" the information, he said.
NGA has only anecdotal evidence of terrorists using online mapping programs for reconnaissance, Burpee said. "Certainly the capability exists," he said. Continued...
Certain sites on Google Earth like the White House and the vice president's residence in Washington, D.C. are obscured to prevent closer examination, but that was not a government directive, Burpee said. NGA has never directed any company to blur their mapping results.
Microsoft's programs also censor certain sites. "There are several areas where the images have been intentionally blurred for security purposes, such as certain buildings and monuments, and we review requests to do so on a case by case basis," according to a company spokesperson.
Google and Microsoft, however, downplayed the security threat of their applications.
The imagery available with Google Street View "is no different from what any person can readily see walking down the street or looking at other pictures online," said Stephen Chau, product manager for Google Maps. "Imagery of this kind is available in a wide variety of formats for cities all around the world."
Street View is currently available for San Francisco, New York, Las Vegas, Miami, and Denver and plans for the nation's capital are in the works. "We will be adding Street View imagery for new cities, including Washington D.C., on an ongoing basis," Chau said.
There were rumblings in the blogosphere that Google was blocking its international users from using the Street View function, but that is not the case. Chau said any disruption in the availability of Street View was likely due to high traffic on the day of the launch.
"We are always working to improve the comprehensiveness of our services, but we can't guarantee that they will be available to all users at all times," he said.
Microsoft's Live Search Maps, meanwhile, "was designed with security and privacy concerns taken into account," said a company spokesperson. "Our mapping products fully comply with U.S. laws governing the acquisition and publishing of aerial imagery."
"It is understandable that when some people first see Live Search Maps and our various views they may get the wrong impression that you can zoom in to recognize people, read vehicle license plates, and otherwise obtain personal information from the images," the Microsoft spokesperson said. "However, you cannot. The clarity of the images is impressive, but beyond a certain distance the images become 'pixilated' and blur."
One independent defense intelligence agency also gave the new mapping apps the all-clear.
Online mapping detractors need to "get over it," said Theresa Hitchens, director for the Center for Defense Information, which analyzes U.S. defense policy. "The technology is out there; it's not going away. And given that, what's the issue with taking the benefits of the technology to the public rather than leaving it in government hands?"
Terrorists are certainly capable of buying cameras and taking pictures of U.S. landmarks "even in the absence of Google Street View," Hitchens said.
Hitchens acknowledged that "companies do have to police themselves … to avoid anything truly over the line, but by and large, I don't really see a security issue here."
Home Page