Slashdot Mirror


Google Unofficially Announces GDrive By Leaked Code

An anonymous reader writes "Google has unofficially announced the GDrive by source code. In an in-direct way, Google has publicly advertised the new, much-anticipated online storage drive called the GDrive. If you take a look at the source code of some javascript within the Google Pack, you will clearly see the GDrive referenced. The code categorizes the GDrive as an 'Online file backup and storage' device. It also provides the following descriptions; 'GDrive provides reliable storage for all of your files, including photos, music and documents' and 'GDrive allows you to access your files from anywhere, anytime, and from any device — be it from your desktop, web browser or cellular phone.'"

47 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Like xdrive and idrive before it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally, somewhere to back up all of my important porn!

    1. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by relguj9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. I'll be curious to see the google analytic stats on what these drives are actually used for. Taking bets on the percentage that is porn, my guess is 80%.

      Anyone else at least on notice that Google is looking to know not only all of the sites we visit with google analytics and chrome, all of the videos we watch on google video and correlate this with our gmail/video logins, but also get statistics on data that we store.

      Not that they are necessarily going to do anything nefarious with it. But it's a lot of data that, if someone had access to and was inclined to mine, could yield an unnerving amount of information about an individual who heavily uses Google products.

      I think I'm gonna change the drop box on my browser to Yahoo! for a while. Need to spread the love.

    2. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by Malevolyn · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is this just Google's front for collecting porn for themselves? Taking all bets!

      --
      Your ad here.
    3. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey! Who told you about Google Perv? That hasn't been released yet!

    4. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by Vectronic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pfft, that was the last codeword, it's now referred to as GSpot.

    5. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by RCourtney · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pfft, that was the last codeword, it's now referred to as GSpot (BETA).

      There, fixed that for ya. And don't feel bad if you can't find it - submitter had to dig deep in the code to even know it existed, too.

    6. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 3, Funny

      It would probably cross the line, but I'd love to see them do a Zeitgeist report on the porn people have in there.

      --
      Stasis is death. Embrace change.
    7. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by Winckle · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eric Schimdt likes porn just like every other guy.

      He just happens to archive it in the petabytes instead of gigabytes.

    8. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by calmofthestorm · · Score: 4, Funny

      Eric Schimdt likes porn just like every other guy.

      He just happens to archive it in the pedabytes instead of gigabytes.

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    9. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by aliquis · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hate sticky porn

    10. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by aliquis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd only use it for backup, why waste limited backup space on porn? Porn is already well backed up by everyone else.

    11. Re:Like xdrive and idrive before it by KDR_11k · · Score: 4, Funny

      With the kind of stuff that's on the internet... One look in the wrong folder would drive you insane faster than a staring contest with Cthulhu.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  2. Security by nz17 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know that Google is all about introducing new (usually useful) services which tie into its already existing sites and services, and for that I applaud it. However I hope that it takes privacy, security, and encryption into account for this new online storage service. It's one thing to do a search with Google's engine - trusting Google with personal files is another issue entirely.

    Also, here's hoping for a rich desktop client instead of just a Web interface.

    --
    Most men are not thought unwise until they speak.
  3. Obvious by bhsx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, who didn't see this coming at least four years ago? I'm glad it's finally closer to "official" but really, not a surprise in the slightest.

    --
    put the what in the where?
    1. Re:Obvious by dmomo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If by "closer to official" you mean "closer to Beta" which for Google means "yeah, it's official, we just cannot claim it's 100% without flaw"

      See also: GMail... still in BETA!

  4. Re:Sounds Good. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dm_crypt

    Give them my data? Not bloody likely. Poke around with some free storage for non-critical applications? Sure, sounds fun.

  5. Not as surprise by inKubus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Duplicity, a clever backup tool, has let you use Gmail boxes for a storage engine for a while now. I'm sure they are just taking the next logical step. Of course, you can assume that they will probably index your files in some way, even if it isn't made public.

    --
    Cool! Amazing Toys.
  6. Misplaced priorities? by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Informative

    I know this is not officially released by Google but I would rather have Google get Gmail out of beta. My school would like to move to Gmail but the "beta" label is a show stopper on this front. What do you think?

    1. Re:Misplaced priorities? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you pay for Gmail ("Google Apps for business") it isn't beta, and it has an SLA and whatnot. Gmail's interpretation of "beta" seems roughly the same as all the other free webmail services' interpretation of their default release states, so it isn't as though Google is really behind in that area. If "beta" is just a scary word, ignore it. If you are waiting to get enterprise SLAs for no money, forget it.

    2. Re:Misplaced priorities? by rriven · · Score: 5, Informative

      They only offer at most 95% per month, MINUS pre-scheduled downtimes, and non-scheduled downtimes that are "exempt". Honestly, 90% uptime per month real. The key is that these numbers are not real, because of the possible exemptions and everything, so a real SLA is unknown.

      You could not be more wrong:

      Enterprise-class service â" Google Apps includes a 99.9% uptime SLA.* Phone support is available for critical issues.

      *The 99.9% uptime SLA for Google Apps is offered to organizations using Google Apps Premier Edition, as described in the Google Apps Premier Edition Terms of Service

      http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/messaging.html

      Sure it is only 3 nines but that is way better than the 90% you said

      --
      Dan
    3. Re:Misplaced priorities? by evanbd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Would you be willing to offer a contract to someone else with reliability better than Google is, using your water-damaged ancient hardware? The SLA isn't about what they think they are likely to deliver, but what they think they can *guarantee*. There is some safety margin in there.

    4. Re:Misplaced priorities? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You clearly didn't follow the asterisk in the page that you quoted to the actual SLA.

      http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/terms/sla.html

      This is not a normal SLA. "Downtime" is measured as a function of error rate for ALL users, not just you. If one customer is out of service, it's not downtime.

      Downtime is also measured in blocks of ten minutes. If you are without email for 9 minutes 30 seconds, then your inbox loads, then it goes down for a further 9 minutes, there was no downtime.

      With terms like that, Google can claim whatever uptime they want.

      Also note that the only recourse you have in the event that things go so badly that the agreement is violated is a longer service term at no cost (Maximum 15 days). No refunds.

  7. making up new words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "in-direct"?

    that word is im-possible.

    hold on, i have to tie my shoe-lace, be-cause i keep tripping over all the hy-phens.

    1. Re:making up new words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      grammar-nazi's

      Well played, sir!

  8. Saturated by fireteller2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This market place is already saturated with companies like box.net, dropbox, mozy, amazon s3, xdrive, pocketque and many others. What is interesting about GDrive, other then it'll search through my data to mine advertising opportunities?

    Better be a massive amount of free online storage. What is the online storage to privacy exchange rate anyway?

    1. Re:Saturated by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From what I've read, you'll be able to map it like another drive on your computer, just drag and drop files. Unlike a slow web interface with other products, you can very quickly access your files. There will be tons of storage, and it will be completely free with no nags to upgrade to a premium service.

      Otherwise, exactly like this should have been handled by everyone else from day 1.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  9. Re:what happens if google folds by Directrix1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have a backup. Just like with any storage.

    --
    Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
  10. Never debug comments by Weaselmancer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only debug code.

    I'd guess the code must be commented out since the service in question doesn't exist. So if this code were to try to connect to it, it would hang. Right?

    So it's non-executing code. Which means that maybe it's a leftover from some meeting where they thought they would offer this service but changed their minds since then.

    How many times have you been fooled by reading outdated comments?

    Believe it when it launches. Inferring Google's direction from reading code comments is clever, but perhaps a bit too clever.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  11. gdrive.com by dmomo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Taken right now by a web design firm. Curious how long they stay there for.

    1. Re:gdrive.com by LiENUS · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gmail doesn't use Gmail.com.

      It doesnt?

      Domain Name: GMAIL.COM
      Registrar: MARKMONITOR INC.
      Whois Server: whois.markmonitor.com
      Referral URL: http://www.markmonitor.com/
      Name Server: NS1.GOOGLE.COM

      Weird. Did you perhaps mean gmail doesn't exclusively use gmail.com?

    2. Re:gdrive.com by verbatim_verbose · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then how do you suppose that email sent to user@gmail.com gets to the Google account? Someone just kindly forwards it?

  12. Re:Yeah, Right. by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What do you mean 'when'? Google has already openly stated that mining is part of their business model for GMail.. Why would GDrive be any different. If I was to use it, I think I would take ten minutes to write a script that encrypts the files first. I'd even go so far as to mangle the filenames and keep track of the original names locally. With that in mind, what the heck, GDrive could be good for small uses here and there if it's free.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  13. Re:Sounds Good. by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My MP3 collection and some digital photos I don't wnat to lose isn't like some secret, private data I'm terrified they will analyze.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  14. Re:what happens if google folds by Chyeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    agreed, but this will most likely be connected to some *cough cloud* form on online computing. will it have backup abilities ?

    No, at no time whatsoever will you ever have access to the files you store on gdrive. In fact, gdrive is really just a counter attached to /dev/null

    Will it have backup abilities? WTF? You either uploaded a file to it, thus implying you had access to it, enabling you to back it up. Or you can download the file from it, thus implying you have access to it, enabling you to back it up.

  15. Re:Gmailfs by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

    Description: Use your GMail account as a filesystem
      GmailFS provides a mountable Linux filesystem which uses your Gmail
      account as its storage medium. GmailFS is a Python application and
      uses the FUSE userland filesystem infrastructure to help provide the
      filesystem, and libgmail to communicate with Gmail.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  16. Enough with the evil Google routine by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Informative

    How did you get modded informative?

    When Bush was talking about wanting search data for all US citizens, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL handed it over without even really being asked. Google refused, and said they would not hand over any search data unless they were forced to do so by a court of law. Google has also since decided to anonymize their logs sooner and increase their privacy policies.

    The only time Google has handed data over to a government agency was one case in Brazil, when they were forced to do so by a court, and even then, they didn't do it immediately when they were first ordered to do so. And that case was when Google had evidence on a child porn ring who distributed child porn via Orkut.

    So please, explain to me how can you justify statements with no basis on fact?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Enough with the evil Google routine by cperciva · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only time Google has handed data over to a government agency...

      I think you mean "the only time we know about...". Under the PATRIOT act it's entirely possible that Google has handed over lots of data to the US government but has been instructed that they're not allowed to tell anyone about it.

  17. How do they make money from this? by elucido · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sure this is very useful, but whats in it for Google?

    1. Re:How do they make money from this? by Korin43 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More information about you? Plus, they can.

    2. Re:How do they make money from this? by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 4, Funny

      > If I mount it with encfs, what information do they have about me?

      Your favourite password phase as well?

  18. Re:what happens if google folds by dissy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    agreed, but this will most likely be connected to some *cough cloud* form on online computing. will it have backup abilities ?

    No, backups are your job.

    Just don't delete the stuff you upload.

    You need to have the files on your computer First before you can store them on gdrive anyway. They are already there.
    The act of spending no energy, and doing nothing, in that case gives you your backup.
    The act of spending energy, time, resources, and thought on deleting your copies afterwards, is not just a waste but will put you in a bad situation when something happens to gdrive (or where ever you stored the copy at)

    And if you DON'T have the files already on your computer, then you dont need to be worrying about uploading them to anywhere :}

  19. Re:Sounds Good. by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you have any reason to suggest that Google is handing over data to the RIAA when Google has historically fought to protect the privacy of its users?

    I have no reason to suspect Google would not do precisely that, if ordered to by the courts (after the inevitable, expensive appeals are finally exhausted). Much as I like cyberpunk sci-fi, I don't see Google declaring itself an extraterritorial sovereign entity no longer subject to national laws any time soon...

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  20. Re:Yeah, Right. by rossifer · · Score: 5, Informative

    btw, anyone using google can be tapped by the US (or any local) gov. google replicates data all over the world and so any local DC can be 'tapped' by the gov in that region and google will be happy to roll over. giving data to google is not something you do when you need privacy, we should know THAT much by now. google has already tipped their hand more times than needed to see the true 'rollover to the gov' colors they have.

    I work for Google. In a project closely related to "GDrive". And I know for an absolute fact that you, sir, are full of shit. Google is the one company that has stood up to our government's "requests for information" and said, "Show me the subpoena." Hell, that's one of the big reasons I work at Google. As for your privacy, the only entities that can see the actual content of your files are 1) you, 2) the ads analysis program, 2) Google developers/system maintenance staff who sign a blood oath that they will not violate user trust, and 3) government agencies that provide a lawful warrant or subpoena for the data. The moment that list fails to be complete, a significant fraction of all Google employees will leave in disgust.

  21. Re:what happens if google folds by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    don't think big trusted names can't fold. and if it happens, how will you get this data? i would advise extreme caution on what you use this for.

    Is there any form of data storage that doesn't beg for advice like this?

    - Hard drives fail.
    - CDRs deteroriate.
    - USB may not be around forever.

    I mean, I appreciate the suggestion and all, but it's like there's a story about being able to purchase a flying car and me advising that you get insurance for it.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  22. Re:Yeah, Right. by rossifer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    https has been vulnerable to MITM attack, and is vulnerable to bogus keys (that look valid), but is currently pretty safe from attack when using a sane browser. Lots of people (inside and outside the company) keep very close watch on google.com's SSL keys, so without someone poisoning your DNS (and close to just your DNS)...

    If you're enabling SSL on your connection to google, your data is as safe as we can make it. The government possibly has access to the raw bits on the wire between our datacenters, but still doesn't have access to your data (inferring the argument behind this assertion is left as an exercise to the reader).

    The easiest way for the government to get to your data without you knowing it is to rootkit your machine. The lowest-cost weakness isn't on the google end of things.

  23. Re:Gmailfs by skeeto · · Score: 4, Informative

    Eh, I have found it to be horrendesly slow and quite unreliable, as the files I put in frequently come back out differently.

  24. Pricing by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here's hoping that GDrive can address the biggest problem with online backup services today: price. For backing up large amounts of data (10s or 100s of GB), it is vastly cheaper to buy 2-3 additional hard drives and make your own backups than it is to use any online service.

    For example, to back up 1 TB of data, buy two external TB drives from Newegg, copy your files to the drives, and store one offsite. Total cost: $200.

    To backup to Amazon's S3 service, transfer all the data once, and store it for a year. $100 for the transfer plus (12 months * $150/month) for storage = $1900 for the year.

    I'm sure there are good reasons for the cost discrepancy. I know the $200 cost doesn't include time, electricity, or the possible need to replace drives. But still, I think there has to be a way that clever engineers can bring the costs down for online storage. The fact that most of the data on a backup system doesn't need to be loaded at the same time should open up possibilities for cost savings. I'd be willing to accept a little delay in accessing my backups if it would allow for a much cheaper service.