Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google WiFi+VPN Confirmed

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Google is actually (confirmed!) rolling out their wifi network, first in the San Francisco bay area (see the FAQ for details.) They are also including a Secure Access program for use in conjunction with this. So far, as per usual, it's in beta, and only for the San Fran bay area. Soon the entire US, perhaps??"

76 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. I get redirected to www.google.com by Sindri · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I click the link. I'm in the UK.

    --
    Sindri Traustason.
    1. Re:I get redirected to www.google.com by spuke4000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, should have previewed that. Here it is again, formatted more nicely:

      What is Google Secure Access?

      Google Secure Access is a downloadable client application that allows users to establish a more secure WiFi connection.

      Why would I want to download and install Google Secure Access?

      Google Secure Access allows you to establish a more secure connection while using Google WiFi. By using Google Secure Access, your internet traffic will be encrypted, preventing others from viewing the information you transmit.

      Does Google Secure Access connect to a VPN server?

      Yes, Google Secure Access connects to Google's VPN ("Virtual Private Network") server provided for this service.

      Why did Google develop Google Secure Access?

      One of our engineers recognized that secure WiFi was virtually non-existent at most locations. As a result, he used his 20% project time to begin an initiative to offer users more secure WiFi access. Google Secure Access is the result of this endeavor.

      What sort of information does Google have access to?

      If you choose to use Google Secure Access, your internet traffic will be encrypted and sent through Google's servers to the Internet. The data that is received will then be encrypted and sent back through our servers to your computer. Your privacy is important to us, we strongly encourage you to read our Privacy Policy to be fully informed about how your privacy is protected.

      Is there a fee for using Google Secure Access?

      No, Google Secure Access is free.

      Where can I go to download Google Secure Access?

      The program can currently be downloaded at certain Google WiFi locations in the San Francisco Bay Area.

      When I install Google Secure Access, why does it ask if I also want to install the Google Toolbar?

      We've included the option to install the Google Toolbar because it improves your browsing experience.

      Can I uninstall Google Secure Access?

      Yes. You can uninstall Google Secure Access by simply running the Uninstall program. This can be found by clicking on Start Menu, Programs, Google Secure Access, and then choosing Uninstall.

      How do I make my connection even more secure?

      You can make your connection even more secure by using a software firewall. Windows XP users with Service Pack 2 can find it by clicking on Start, Control Panel, and then choosing Windows Firewall.

      Will my corporate VPN still work?

      Yes. You can connect to your corporate VPN while running Google Secure Access.

      I have configured Google Secure Access to connect automatically, but it's not working. What's going on?

      Certain wireless LAN management utilities and older wireless LAN adapter drivers prevent Google Secure Access from detecting that you're connected to the Google WiFi network. In this case it will not connect automatically, and you should connect manually to ensure the privacy and security of your network traffic.

      Will Google Secure Access work at other locations?

      While Google Secure Access should work, we have not tested it at other locations.

      Why is Google Secure Access a beta product?

      Google Secure Access is a new product that is only available at certain locations in the San Francisco Bay Area. We are constantly working to improve this product.

      --
      This post cannot be rebroadcast without the express written constent of Major League Baseball.
  2. And then the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    First the city, then the USA, and then: THE WORLD!

    Muwahahahahahahahaha!

  3. First post... by dark-br · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... using the google wifi access :)

  4. Doesn't work by clinko · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not surprisingly, it doesn't work unless you're in that area :)

    Here is a link to a CNN article about it.

    1. Re:Doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As an added note, Google gets to see even more user traffic and data since it all routes through their servers. This is a brilliant tool for them to mine user usage and behavior patterns and to build data profiles on individuals. Its a wonderful idea. Imaging combining this information with name, SSN, phone number, what car you drive, you pets name (seriously), etc: a marketers/telemarkets/spammers dream. This is the answer to the rejection of the advertiser's cookies.

  5. That was quick... by metaomni · · Score: 2, Informative

    CNN broke the story as well, but it seems Google has quickly fixed all the links.

  6. The links don't work by jdaluz · · Score: 2

    They are redirecting to the main google page, as is the base url of http://wifi.google.com/. It's not just slashdotting either, as these were redirecting before the article was available for comment.

  7. More info by Andrew+Lenahan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since the two links in the article don't seem to work at present, here's a link to a Reuters story for more information.. http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?t ype=topNews&storyID=2005-09-20T113746Z_01_HO038752 _RTRUKOC_0_UK-GOOGLE-WIFI.xml&archived=False

    --
    Andrew Lenahan http://www.starblind.com/
  8. The entire US???? by Nutria · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Someone doesn't realize how very large the US is.

    All of the densely and moderately populated areas, but there's no money to be made in doing this in towns (large and small) and rural areas.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  9. I'm in China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:I'm in China by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Funny
      I'm in China

      Attention citizen, you have been doing evil, posting to a capitalist website! Please report to the "Do No Evil" Friendship Happy Center.

      --
      Please help metamoderate.
    2. Re:I'm in China by s.d. · · Score: 3, Funny

      Attention citizen, you have been doing evil, posting to a capitalist website! Please report to the "Do No Evil" Friendship Happy Center.

      I see by the Big Board we got a Negative Nellie in Sector Two. I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to kind of freeze and prepare for Re-Neducation.

  10. RIAA by BrGaribaldi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, will google turn over access information to the RIAA when people start using the free WIFI to download music?

  11. XP and 2K only... by yorugua · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... is google turning *that* evil ?

    1. Re:XP and 2K only... by generic-man · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With the exception of the Gmail Notifier, every piece of end-user software that Google's ever released has been for Windows only.

      Some people here believe that Google has a duty to release for other OSes (especially Linux, which is so oft-used there) but that's not where the end users are. Perhaps when the software comes out of beta it'll be ported.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:XP and 2K only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And from their FAQ:
      When I install Google Secure Access, why does it ask if I also want to install the Google Toolbar?<br>
      We've included the option to install the Google Toolbar because it improves your browsing experience.<br>
      Right now it's optional, but will Google one day go the way of the bundling (...) ?
  12. Coral Cache Link still works by mattrwilliams · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is is: http://wifi.google.com.nyud.net:8090/faq.html

    --
    The generation of random numbers is too important to leave to chance
  13. The Next Step by ZurichPrague · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And the next step (after rolling it out nationwide) is to introduce a cheap ($30?) handset that accesses the network. A "cellphone" with free phone calls -- forever.

    That whistling is the sound of every phone company imploding at once.

  14. Just makes sense by peterjhill2002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could end up being a hugely smart move.... I am sure that 90% of you have already figured out the business model... They will know exactly where you are (or close enough for hand grenades and horse shoes and... ads)...

    Watch out clear channel... Why pay thousands to put your ad on an ugly billboard when you can put your ad less than two feet from a potential customers face... local.adwords.google.com.... (fake url) customers already use gmail and google at the hotspot, even without having some annoying gonna be hacked forced page to surf for free web machine, they can just set all the google sites that people already visit to places right around the corner...

    If podcasts are going to replace radio, google wifi will replace ?
    (a question for all those who recently took the sat)

    1. Re:Just makes sense by Keck · · Score: 3, Funny

      If podcasts are going to replace radio, google wifi will replace ? (a question for all those who recently took the sat)

      I thought they removed analogies from the SAT like 10 years ago?

      --
      A computer without Microsoft is like ice cream without ketchup.
    2. Re:Just makes sense by MoogMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On the upshot, properly targeted adverts are useful for the consumer too. If you see an advert for a product that you are likely to buy anyway, then that's probably not a bad thing.

    3. Re:Just makes sense by CommieLib · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Amen! What bugs me about commercials is not that I'm being pitched to, but that it's a waste of both of our time! There's no point in showing me an ad for Massengil.

      Show me an ad for Arturo Fuente, a book by Berkely linguistics professor John McWhorter, or a program about the 80's British comedy Yes, Prime Minister, and I'm very likely to bite. At the very least, I will be actively interested in the ad. This level of granularity should make it possible.

      I'm a YIMBY for this (Yes, In My BackYard). I have no problem, repeat, no problem having ads targeted to my interests given that I will be presented with ads regardless.

      The flipside of this is privacy, I suppose. That may be the relevancy-killer.

      --
      If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
    4. Re:Just makes sense by wcdw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Define "useful". Frankly, if I'm looking for a product, I'll go look for it. In the meantime, I do not want YAA (yet another ad) shoved under my face.

      There is no content of which I can conceive that I personally would find useful. For many years I found everything I needed in the yellow pages, without ever once opening any junk mail.

      How is that different now that it's in my face, not even hidden discreetly in an envelope I can discard unopened?

      Ads - targeted or otherwise - are a waste of bandwidth, at best. Thank GOD for AdBlocker! (Not too mention the S/WAN communities, who have been responsible for securing my wireless connections for some years - without tracking my behaviour.)

      --
      If you're not living on the edge, you're just taking up space!
  15. In the entire US - sure... by gyepi · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the FAQ: "Why did Google develop Google Secure Access?
    One of our engineers recognized that secure WiFi was virtually non-existent at most locations. As a result, he used his 20% project time to begin an initiative to offer users more secure WiFi access. Google Secure Access is the result of this endeavor."
    That guy would need slightly more that 20% project time to help extending the service to the entire US..

    --
    Attitudes make the difference between Space and Time: we want to MAX our temporal, and MIN our spatial extension.
  16. Boston? by kevin.fowler · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google, please roll this out in my area. My neighbors finally got smart and put passwords on their wireless routers.

    --
    Bury me in mashed potatoes.
    1. Re:Boston? by el_womble · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sorry sir, we're going to have to ask for your geek card. WiFi Passwords are for people that don't have time to crack the network. As a /. member you are expected, ney, demanded to crack that password.

      Now, don't come back until you've cracked that password and distributed to everyone you know. At the very least man, don't admit that you don't know how to break the security!!!

      --
      This is a JOKE. It may not be very funny. But I at least want to know that when people mod it as a troll, they are doing it because its not funny, and not because they think I'm a terrorist.

      --
      Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
  17. I volunteer my house by keraneuology · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would jump at the opportunity to volunteer my yard the location for a low-powered neighborhood uplink to this service. Instead of expensive towers that provide access to everybody all at once and require various approval from the FCC and FAA (if the tower is tall enough) find people willing to host an uplink for a few square blocks. People like me. No matter which route I go -any- internet access will cost about $60 months - I either need to get a land line + DSL because nobody will provide DSL unless the line has an active phone number or I can get Comcast (and only Comcast because the local township granted them exclusive rights of service. If Google provides the equipment and the link I will be more than happy to ensure that my neighbors have another alternative for internet access.

    --
    If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
  18. Money? by jpsowin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but there's no money to be made in doing this in towns (large and small) and rural areas.

    Do you think there is money to made at all when they are not charging?

    1. Re:Money? by interiot · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Do you think a publicly-trade company is doing something that will lose money over the long term?

      Just because they aren't charging money directly doesn't mean they don't still need to earn money per eyeball. Whatever method they have to make money, it's still going to be dependent on the population density and economic prosperity of the area.

      (they're not going to stick hotspots under the ocean, or in space, for instance)

    2. Re:Money? by neoform · · Score: 5, Insightful

      considering their Privacy Policy states that they'll keep records of what sites you visit along with some other info, yes, yes i do think there is money to be made off this.

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    3. Re:Money? by Brushfireb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dont kid yourself. Public companies are perhaps the BEST at doing something that will lose the money over the short or long term.

      The companies that are best at making money are mid size companies. Hence why they grow into large companies, original management moves out or retires, and corporate stooges step in -- who have no real money invested.

      Thats the real problem with big big big public companies -- all the people invested arent anywhere near or have any idea what goes on in said company.

      It wouldnt suprise me at all if Google starts feeling the pain on some of these fancy "innovations" they seem to be on about. Right now they are able to fund such nonsense with a immensly hyped stock price and wonderful public relations.

    4. Re:Money? by limber · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's an article in the current issue of Business 2.0 that speculates as to the business model.

      http://www.business2.com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,1 093558,00.html

      Part of it is not a revenue generation thing so much as a cost savings. Google has been buying up a lot of dark fibre... They're trying to eliminate a middleman for IP transit fees. "Millions of dollars per month in savings" etc.

    5. Re:Money? by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm no networking, web server superstar, but isn't it possible for Google to take this information and create advertising vehicles targeted not only at local demographics, but on time based demographic information as well?

      The little factoid "80% of web users in Seattle view news websites between the hours of 8 - 10. Of these people 30% goto site A, 40% goto site B, 15% goto site C" would be pretty handy for marketers.

      Not only that, but it opens up AdWords and AdSense to having a new layer for bidding - timeframe. AdWords can already be targeted to geographic locations, add the time factor in and you have created a reason for people to start bidding even more money for advertising. It would be extremely costly to "own" a keyword for all timeframes, but a cost some business would be more than willing to pay.

      I'm also not too sure on this point, but can't google sell this traffic information to large marketing firms also? If you strip out all identifiers, you have kept up your side of the privacy agreement, correct?

    6. Re:Money? by Chazmyrr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. The real problem with big big big public companies is that senior executives give themselves huge stock options, sacrifice long term profitability for short term gain, exercise their options, diversify their portfolio, and take a position elsewhere before they have to answer for their actions.

    7. Re:Money? by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since it sounds like the data is only encrypted between your client and their proxy server, I'd say they'll be making a lot of money from traffic analysis and user-behaviour tracking.

      Knowing Google they'll be able to (=they probably will) track every URL every person enters, and tie this to your Google cookie/GMail account, etc.

      I'm hardly one of the tinfoil-hat brigade, but this is basically the Google Dialup util idea repackaged for broadband:

      Google Dialup: "Slight speed increase in exchange for us looking over your shoulder the whole time you're on-line, tracking your behaviour and spotting patterns."

      Google WiFi Access: "Slight security increase in exchange for us looking over your shoulder the whole time you're on-line, tracking your behaviour and spotting patterns."

      I'm no trendy Google-basher, but it's really starting to rankle how every major initiative from Google seems to have these little hooks attached - even Google Talk (while based on Jabber) apparently doesn't support the server-to-server protocol, so you need to specifically have a GMail account and connect to Google's servers to talk to anyone using it. IE, all your chatting is forced to go through their servers... wonder why?

      And now this - they're supplying free VPN for an entire city (to begin with), spending (conservatively) thousands or millions on hardware, and we're supposed to believe they're getting nothing in return?

      Bullshit - if they aren't invading privacy and tracking user-behaviour I'll eat my hat. And if you don't think they are, then what are they getting out of it?

      --
      Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
    8. Re:Money? by gid13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would assume the answer is yes. More interestingly, though I'm generally fairly into privacy, I think this way of doing it is probably good.

      1. I have no problem with expressing my preferences to marketers.
      2. Most people won't have problems doing that if it's done in a way that doesn't collect personal information, and
      3. Unlike spyware, it doesn't use your computer's resources to do any of it.

      Basically companies will make more things I want, advertising will be more likely to be for things I want, and thus annoy me less, and companies will subsidize a useful service with advertising money to accomplish all this.

      Seems to me everyone wins here.

    9. Re:Money? by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But wait, any ISP you're using now can already track your every move online right now. I don't believe there's any law to stop them. The only difference is, you're paying them $60/mo to do it.

    10. Re:Money? by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Granted, but my ISP hasn't made it its public stated intention to categorise and present all the data in the world.

      I used to believe that Google had the right idea (after all, more information is almost always good), but they seem to be blind or dismissive of perfectly valid privacy concerns.

      They started off listening to their users (which is why, even now, www.google.com isn't a nasty Yahoo-style portal), but somewhere along the way they've come in grave danger of ignoring their users' privacy concerns, and igniting a backlash.

      This level of "shut up, we know what's best" arrogance is also reminding me increasingly of Microsoft - they also started off listening to users, but at some point they decided They Knew Best, and stopped. Witness the Bill Gates quote about there being nothing they won't say or do to get people to do things their way (because "their way" and "the best way" are synonymous).

      Like it or not, Google are now very powerful, and have a lot of fingers in a lot of pies. People don't mind a webmail company hypothetically being able to read your mail. They (perhaps) don't mind a search engine linking every search you do to your cookie. They don't mind their ISP being able (in theory) to track their browsing habits.

      However, when one company can do all of this, can tie it back to you, personally, refuses to respect users' privacy and has publically shown it likes to gather every scrap of information it can and use it for advertising purposes... well, suddenly a lot of people have a problem.

      Don't get me wrong - I firmly believe Google have honourable intentions, and I'm not expecting to get junk-mail through my letterbox because I used GMail and happened to log onto a Google Access hotspot in the same week. However, despite their noble intentions they display incredibly (and unnecessarily) invasive behaviour, and seem to have no respect at all for user concerns or privacy. At the very least, they can't even be bothered to address these concerns and demonstrate they aren't stepping out of line.

      While I still think they're trying to hold fast to "Don't Be Evil", arrogantly thinking you know better than the very legitimate concerns of your users is the first step on the way.

      --
      Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  19. The link in the article is wrong. Fixed link here. by buro9 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Note the trailing 'l':
    http://wifi.google.com/download.html

    Basically any 404 Not Found gets redirected to your local Google page... so get the link right and it works :)

    And can people please RTFA. It's not free wi-fi, they don't have to roll out tons of gear... it's a VPN. It's to secure your connection from third party sniffers, and to give Google more info, ad insertion capabilities, etc... not a physical hardware network of wi-fi points.

  20. Where are they? by Yi+Ding · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I couldn't find a single mention on the Google website of where the access points actually are in the Bay Area. Anybody care to post a link or list?

    1. Re:Where are they? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are none.

      It's a VPN. Nothing more.

  21. Not the RIAA... by flimnap · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, Google probably won't turn over data to the RIAA, but this looks like another "Do your web browsing through a Google proxy! It's free! Don't bother reading our vague privacy policy!" Between this -- which they seem to be also encouraging the use of with non-Google wifi networks -- and Google Accelerator, it seems that a large number of people could be used by Google in a study of web-browsing habits.

    1. Re:Not the RIAA... by generic-man · · Score: 4, Informative

      They've done this many times without any fanfare: each result URL is a link to a Google wrapper, but they use onMouseOver='' to pretend to show you the real URL in your status bar. Here's one write-up about what was being done recently.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:Not the RIAA... by generic-man · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know this is just another "assertion on some random Internet discussion board," but I have seen Google wrap search results links myself before the launch of Google's Search History BETA feature. I'm sorry that I haven't kept my browser cache around for 18 months, but I know I've seen these links at least a year ago.

      --
      For more information, click here.
  22. This isn't hardware by daves · · Score: 5, Informative

    To those commenting on how hard this is...

    The announcement is not about rolling out hotspots. They are just providing an easy-to-set-up VPN connection using downloadable client software. Extending it to the rest of the country would just require distributed VPN host nodes.

    --
    People who disagree with you are not automatically evil, greedy, or stupid.
  23. Why would I cheer. by Irvu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google is rapidly expanding to the point where they seem poised to be the Ma Bell, AT&T, Microsoft, or Verizon of the online world. No criticism of their work and all but I like a little competition in my world.

  24. "Beta" means . . . by EraserMouseMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just be happy that you got something for free. You have no right to complain about anything because we put "beta" on it even though it is far beyond beta-grade.

    So 5 years from now if your Google WiFi beta connection drops out you must react in the following manner, "Hmmm. . . that's interesting. I can't communicate with my clients anymore. But I guess I can only blame myself for depending on a Google, ahem, uh, a beta product."

  25. Re:All your Internet are belong to us by ravind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You took the words right out of my mouth. This is apparently something they've been working on for some time. First the Google Accelerator and now this. Coincidentally both of these products send all your traffic through their servers.

    Do no evil? Commendable philosophy, but do I want to be put in a position where I only have your word to rely on to ensure that you do no evil to me?

  26. This isn't an ISP it's a VPN client. by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is a VPN client.

    You download the software and it creates a VPN to vpn.google.com. It doesn't even have anything to do with wireless other than using this with wireless allows you to encrypt all your traffic on each end instead of with weak WEP or otherwise.

    I just downloaded the client and just using my normal network card in my PC I was able to successfully connect to google and an ipconfig reveals a second connection:

    PPP adapter vpn.google.com:
    Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
    Description : WAN (PPP/SLIP) Interface
    Physical Address : 00-53-45-00-00-00
    Dhcp Enabled : No
    IP Address : 192.168.201.8
    Subnet Mask : 255.255.255.255
    Default Gateway : 192.168.201.8
    DNS Servers : 66.51.205.100 66.51.206.100

    I only hope they'll create a server version too and give it out. I must say there was zero configuration and a monkey could have installed it. If they release a server version and allow a small amount of configuration this could come in handy.

    I guess one side effect is that I should be able to anonymously browse the web through google.

    Consequently, they must be having DNS issues or something of that nature because nothing seemed to resolve while connected.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:This isn't an ISP it's a VPN client. by MullerMn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I guess one side effect is that I should be able to anonymously browse the web through google.

      Presumably, you mean anonymous to everyone except Google, who will be keeping much tighter logs on what you are up to than your normal ISP would anyway (in line with their terms of service)?

    2. Re:This isn't an ISP it's a VPN client. by cpeterso · · Score: 2, Funny


      And if you don't trust the All-Seeing Google, you can tunnel your own VPN through Google's VPN! Borrow their dumb pipe, but keeping their prying eyes out. :D

      --
      cpeterso
  27. Re:Google OS by EraserMouseMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Never gonna happen. Google's OS is the web browser. I could definately see Google making their own browser though.

  28. Re:All your Internet are belong to us by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Do no evil? Commendable philosophy, but do I want
    > to be put in a position where I only have your
    > word to rely on to ensure that you do no evil to
    > me?

    You are in that position every time you turn your back toward anyone.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  29. Re:MOD GRANDPARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Wow, I'm glad you said something, because I thought I was going crazy..

    Is this some new karma whoring scheme in which the original whore ask for no karma, then berates himself for trying to not get karma and be helpful, and then presents himself with some fine arguments for why he should not be berated by himself for gaining karma for himself, even though he asked that he not get any karma...

    BRILLIANT! I wonder if he modded himself +1 insightful as well... simply BRILLIANT!

  30. Always "Beta?" by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why is it that Google software is always beta and always freezes once there? Does Google have any software that went beyond this beta label?

  31. PPTP VPN by Jacco+de+Leeuw · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Google seems to use PPTP as their VPN protocol. In theory this should mean that you can use other OSes than Windows 2000/XP as well, if you configure the connection manually.

    However, they seem to be generating the username and password on the fly. The username consists of a number. I had expected that you'd have to use your Gmail username and password but this is not the case. There is something fishy about it. Presumably the Google Secure Access client retrieves some credentials over an out-of-band connection (HTTPS? Will have to figure out with a network sniffer).

    There are some curious things in the VPN connectiod that GSA creates. First, they use an IP address (66.28.250.27) instead of vpn.google.com. The IP address is not even owned by Google. The connectiod allows the outdated protocols CHAP and MS-CHAPv1 to be used. Ouch. It also binds the MS Client and File and Printer Sharing to the connection. You better have a firewall on your system before you connect. PublicVPN seems to be a better option but it is not free.

    --
    -------
    Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
    1. Re:PPTP VPN by Jacco+de+Leeuw · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Yup, just as I thought: they use HTTPS to vpn.google.com before the PPTP connection is set up. Presumably to generate the username and password.

      I can connect with my Gmail account but then the connection hangs at the "Port opened" message...

      --
      -------
      Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
    2. Re:PPTP VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      maybe you want to take a look at this xml ;-)

      https://vpn.google.com/getpass/

      66.28.250.27
      2395114012
      Oln0kWc36nA9i3KoRRij

    3. Re:PPTP VPN by austad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The following is a tcpdump log from the OSX PPTP client using a user/pass I obtained from that URL. It failed, and I don't have time to work on it now

      11:42:43.314754 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: S 1641861584:1641861584(0) win 65535
      11:42:43.373705 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: S 1294960942:1294960942(0) ack 1641861585 win 5792
      11:42:43.373819 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: . ack 1 win 65535
      11:42:43.393987 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: P 1:157(156) ack 1 win 65535 : pptp CTRL_MSGTYPE=SCCRQ PROTO_VER(1.0) FRAME_CAP(A) BEARER_CAP(A) MAX_CHAN(0) FIRM_REV(0) [|pptp]
      11:42:43.454221 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: . ack 157 win 5792
      11:42:43.456118 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: P 1:157(156) ack 157 win 5792 : pptp CTRL_MSGTYPE=SCCRP PROTO_VER(1.0) RESULT_CODE(1) ERR_CODE(0) FRAME_CAP() BEARER_CAP() MAX_CHAN(1) FIRM_REV(1) [|pptp]
      11:42:43.466277 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: . ack 157 win 65535
      11:42:43.482869 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: P 157:325(168) ack 157 win 65535 : pptp CTRL_MSGTYPE=OCRQ CALL_ID(4342) CALL_SER_NUM(0) MIN_BPS(300) MAX_BPS(100000000) BEARER_TYPE(Any) [|pptp]
      11:42:43.546831 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: P 157:189(32) ack 325 win 5792 : pptp CTRL_MSGTYPE=OCRP CALL_ID(47232) PEER_CALL_ID(4342) RESULT_CODE(1) ERR_CODE(0) CAUSE_CODE(0) CONN_SPEED(100000000) RECV_WIN(64) PROC_DELAY(0) [|pptp]
      11:42:43.582905 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: P 325:349(24) ack 189 win 65535 : pptp CTRL_MSGTYPE=SLI PEER_CALL_ID(47232) SEND_ACCM(0xffffffff) RECV_ACCM(0xffffffff)
      11:42:43.677533 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: . ack 349 win 5792
      11:42:43.810106 IP 192.168.41.245 > 66.28.250.27: call 47232 seq 1 gre-ppp-payload
      11:42:44.588097 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: F 189:189(0) ack 349 win 5792 11:42:44.588205 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: . ack 190 win 65535
      11:42:44.644231 IP 192.168.41.245.63157 > 66.28.250.27.1723: F 349:349(0) ack 190 win 65535
      11:42:44.715930 IP 66.28.250.27.1723 > 192.168.41.245.63157: . ack 350 win 5792

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    4. Re:PPTP VPN by hagrin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, you can specify either PPTP or L2TP by going to network connections and drilling down on the properties of the GSA VPN. You can see screenshots (and more) here on my forums. (shameless plug).

      --
      Hagrin.com
    5. Re:PPTP VPN by mojorisin67_71 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was able to get the OS X PPTP client to work with a generated
      user/passwd.

      It worked for a while. Now it seems to have stopped.

    6. Re:PPTP VPN by hagrin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Although I haven't tested it yet (as I am having issues getting it to work here), I'm going to assume that everything is going to be passed at time of connection through HTTPS and then the L2TP connection will be established by grabbing the PSK in a similar manner of the ../getpass/ page.

      However, this is purely me guessing ... I need to get it to work first here (different error codes on 2 machines - going to have to see if the router/NAT box is causing the problem here).

      --
      Hagrin.com
    7. Re:PPTP VPN by austad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's possible mine didn't work because the firewall where I'm at might be blocking GRE. I do have a 1-1 NAT address going out, not PAT, so that shouldn't be an issue. But I suspect their rules are permit only tcp and udp.

      Why did Google choose to use PPTP? If someone is at a coffee shop behind a little netgear firewall/ap, the PPTP passthrough usually only works for ONE person, because it can't really do GRE connection tracking since there are no port numbers associated with GRE. It would be much better if they were wrapping this data inside of TCP or UDP to ensure that NAT and/or firewall issues don't prevent the traffic from passing.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
  32. It's becoming the AOL of the future... by Gopal.V · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One window for all your needs. You need an ISP, email service, search, shopping... use Google.

    I see this distinct trend ever since their IPO. They are trying to build a network of their own. It's almost frightening how blind most of my friends are towards this. For example, by using Jabber google becomes the community pet, but they keep a closed community by preventing S2S communication. AOL was massively successful this way building their network on top of telephone lines. Google is doing it on top of the current internet -- google web accelerator and things like this. It is like DRM, sooner or later everyone else will be using it and you'll have a tough choice to make.

    Yahoo ! is no better, but at least people don't blindly trust Y! to do the right thing. I think I still have a couple of mags from 1992 when Bill Gates was the man who could do nothing wrong.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
  33. Re:Google == Linux unfriendly? by generic-man · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google Earth was acquired from Keyhole. Before then it was Windows-only too. Even if they released the source under the GPL (which may not be feasible, if Keyhole had licensed other code) the app wouldn't be necessarily portable to Linux. Look at the handful of not-easily-portable open source apps (Miranda IM, Adium) for other examples.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  34. Re:The link in the article is wrong. Fixed link he by acil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this were simply a software application, why would they refer to "Google WiFi locations"?

    Also, why would it only be available in the SF bay area?

    Where can I go to download Google Secure Access?

    The program can currently be downloaded at certain Google WiFi locations in the San Francisco Bay Area.

  35. Re:The link in the article is wrong. Fixed link he by acil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That still leaves the question of why they call them "Google WiFi locations." Assuming that they are using third party wifi sites, then it really doesn't matter where the traffic comes from (SF, LA, NY, France) as it eventually has to hit the internet to travel over to googles ISP and eventually to google, effectively destroying any need to be local to the VPN server.

  36. Re:All your Internet are belong to us by friedmud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not really Sure what the big deal is... anytime you connect through an ISP they can watch what you do. As far as I'm concerned I trust Google quite a bit more than the un-encrypted coffee slop down the street... but hey... to each his own.

    Friedmud

  37. ARE YOU SURE??? by ferrellcat · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The language is Google's website is vague at best.

    From their privacy policy...

    http://wifi.google.com/privacy-policy.html

    The Google Privacy Policy describes how we treat personal information when you use Google's services, including information provided when you use the Google WiFi or Google Secure Access client. In addition, the following describes our practices that are specific to the Google Secure Access client:
    Notice how they differentiate "Google WiFi" and "Google Secure Access client." Of course, there is no other mention of Google WiFi on the website yet. Technically, this language could be taken to mean that these are two seperate entities, or just one entity.
  38. FAQ on FAQs by layyze · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does anyone else find it odd that Google has released a FAQ (frequenty asked questions) on something that they are just now announcing and that doesn't even actually exist yet?

    How were people asking such specific questions on something non-existant? How were people asking these questions frequently?

    --
    -dr. layyze f. tooth PhD
    1. Re:FAQ on FAQs by funkyfreshcoderdude · · Score: 2, Funny

      They gathered the questions using the new Google Future FAQ Gatherer Beta. Since California breaks away from the US and sinks into the Pacific in the future, they currently can only gather questions from people in western Nevada.

  39. There are huge differences by brunes69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is called lock in and choice.

    If I want to use AOL I have no choice but to use their proprietary PPP software. Google's ISP is standards-based VPN, I can use any number of software packages to connect to it.

    If I want to use the MSN Messenger network I have (at least from MS's point of view) no choice but to use MSN messenger. Google's IM network is standards based Jabber, I can use any client and they even promote this.

    If I want to use MSN TV I have to use Windows Media Player. Google Video uses standard open codecs and I can even download the source code for it.

    AOL and MS want to try to lock you in to use only their services. Google wants to *convince* you to use their services by making them the best. This is a huge difference.

  40. Location Awareness by bulach · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With such small cells (WiFi range), google gets location awareness for free (no need to integrate with any sort of GPS system).

    So, froogle can really narrow your searches to the local shops, just two blocks away. And obviously, sell them ad spaces...

  41. Breaking down Google Secure Access by Geuis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's an article I've posted detailing some both some of the scattered info I've found so far and some further research I've done myself about the client. http://blog.thetechgurus.net/?p=36

  42. Re:The link in the article is wrong. Fixed link he by biglig2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, it's not confirmed but many people suspect it is option three.

    Which is, that they are called Google WiFi spots because Google owns them. We see from various job adverts etc. that Google have been cheaply buying enormous amounts of dark fibre to build a fast global backbone network. Take this, add WiFi or WiMax for the last mile, bing! Instant huge ISP. Make it Ad supported and free, bing! Every internet packet in the world goes thru Google. Google owns the internet, ..., profit!

    --
    ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?