Slashdot Mirror
Google Reportedly Ditching Windows
Reader awyeah notes a Financial Times report that Google is ditching the use of Windows internally. Some blogs have picked up the FT piece but so far there isn't any other independent reporting of the claim, which is based on comments from anonymous Googlers. One indication of possibly hasty reporting is the note that Google "employs more than 10,000 workers internationally," whereas it's easy enough to find official word that the total exceeds 20,000. "The directive to move to other operating systems began in earnest in January, after Google's Chinese operations were hacked, and could effectively end the use of Windows at Google. ... 'We're not doing any more Windows. It is a security effort,' said one Google employee. ... New hires are now given the option of using Apple's Mac computers or PCs running the Linux operating system. 'Linux is open source and we feel good about it,' said one employee. 'Microsoft we don't feel so good about.' ... Employees wanting to stay on Windows required clearance from 'quite senior levels,' one employee said. 'Getting a new Windows machine now requires CIO approval,' said another employee."
Sorry if this is trollish, but Macs are IMO a WORSE security risk than Windows when dealing with spearphishing and other forms of targeted attacks. Security updates are rare. Even if the OS model is better than Microsoft's, it's not a good choice.
Yeah, they can use "the Linux." I could see Google ditching Windows as a primary OS, and maybe just running it as a VM for testing purposes, but any article that doesn't give a specific distro they're moving to rates about an 8.5 on my bullshit-o-meter. Further, it'd be a staggered roll-out, I'm sure. Nothing worse for an IT department than having 20k+ employees needing everything changed. Until there's an official announcement, I won't hold my breath.
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
This will make Mac a much bigger target for hackers. Hopefully Apple will be a little more prompt with security updates than they have in the past.
Moving to MAC and Linux that will eliminate security issues... oh wait?! MAC and Linux have security vunerabilties too? that can't be possible! hopefully i don't get banned from slashdot for suggesting that :)
personally i think it is easier to find vunerabilities in linux, as i can analyze source for bugs. but then once found it's kinda pointless, it's harder to find somebody using linux than it is to find the vunerability in the first place. maybe google will change that.
In any case now google is moving to a malware-proof secure desktop infrastructure they can lay off their security management team who didn't know how to configure Windows in an enterprise environment (despite it being clearly documented with step by step instructions on technet) including the plethora of freely available tools for auditing security configurations...
Now what happens to Google's quality control once they're unable to develop and test against their #1 target platform? (being collectively some version of IE on some version of Windows)
I believe this kind of 'THOU SHALT NOT' bullying by IT overlords tends to backfire somewhere down the line, particularly when there are techies and power users having their capabilities trimmed, particularly when those techies and power users are of the caliber that Google no doubt employs.
Only a minority of their systems were running Windows anyway. They were half Mac and had significant Linux use also. With how Unix-based they are, I was surprised they had any Windows at all.
It is simply unprofessional to use Windows in 2010. There is no excuse. The switching costs on Mac or Linux are tiny compared to what you save in maintenance and training costs later and gain in enhanced productivity. The key is you have to let the user choose which one they want and then you can leave them be to work. A Mac is better than Windows for some users, and Linux is better for the others. Neither needs any significant training if they choose the right one. For some users, an iPad is all they need. I know a couple of business people who switched from XP to iPad and won't go back. They add WebEx and iWork and a Bluetooth keyboard and they're good to go. Ten iPad users can share a single Mac mini with 10 accounts on it for backup and OS updates.
I think we need a kind of certification that says "Windows free" so consumers can avoid companies that use Windows. If you give your personal data to a company that uses Windows you have basically given it to a botnet. Even in the Fortune 500 who have I-T staff and security add-ons they all have botnet infestations. They shouldn't be waiting until they get a class action lawsuit to switch to professional technology.
Obama?
Yeah I call bullshit. OSX is as evil as Microsoft if you're talking about openness.
Hell the cost of operations at Google would go up. They would have to replace their PC's with Macs (Expensive Apple Approved PCs) just to run OSX.
Run Windows 7. Its a hell of a lot better. MS finally got something right.
Its not perfect, but its far better than XP and Vista.
I think MS is headed in the right direction once again.
RTFM, they are not moving from Windows to Macs, they are offering Mac and Linux as options but totally phasing out Windows. And Windows still has security flaws and leaks memory like an old, wooden boat leaks water.
You need training to work on a Windows XP system?
Step 1) Click on the start menu
Step 2) Move the mouse to Outlook
Step 3) Click on the Outlook icon
Pretty steep learning curve. Someone needs to set users free from that jail. The only argument I could see for an IPad is mobility. On the other hand, why would I want to lug around a keyboard and an IPad when I can just carry a tiny netbook.
HA HA HA HA! Seriously. HA HA HA HA!
For office workers and business people there is a WebEx app, Keynote/Pages/Numbers office suite, Salesforce, and many other business-focused apps. Exchange is built-in. These users can easily switch from a 10 year old XP
HA HA HA HA! Seriously. HA HA HA HA!
Three Squirrels
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA.. the quality of the 'office' applications etc on the ipad is sorely lacking. XP is a full functioned operating system vs ipad which is a content consumer even with the crappy keyboard mouse etc. The whole idea of an ipad is to buy more content from itunes.
Nobody cares art-fag.
Anyone who is using Windows would be better with something else.
Anyone who speaks in absolutes is a fool and should be ignored.
Mod parent UP!!!
And they're completely compatible with office? Look, as stupid as I think it is to use MS proprietary formats (.doc, .xlsx, etc.) for serious business work the fact of the matter is that it happens. Companies mandate sending memos as word files, they mandate that presentations be submitted as .pptx. When your software can't open an MS office file because someone used some weird feature buried within MS office that 3rd part software can't handle; no one is going to be sympathetic. You'll be fired or written up because you can't comply with internal company standards for presentations.
"I'm sorry I can't open your proprietary formats, you should send them to me using open source software" is a douchebag thing to say in your personal life. In your professional life, it isn't just rude, it's suicide. See how long you can keep your job while pushing your anti-MS ideals on your office.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
"Linux always has more vulnerabilities publicly found and fixed due to it being open source, a process which leads to a more secure system" - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
"Open Sores" (lol) works BOTH WAYS - if I have the sourcecode to an operating system, I have a FAR easier time of finding bugs in it than I would on a closed source OS, & for instance, using "fuzzers" (or worse, disassembly via debuggers) on it during pen testing... open sourced code WORKS BOTH WAYS (for the good, AND THE BAD too)!
----
"wouldn't you rather have a vulnerability found and fixed, or even found and marked "unpatched" on Securina, than found and exploited (hidden) elsewhere?" - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
Microsoft has their regular "Patch Tuesday" every 2nd Tues. of the month, and if the exploit's "critical"? They often issue an "out of band" patch, earlier than that.
----
"Should be fixed, but how many Linux systems actually need to defend themselves against local DoS attacks?" - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
The same as Windows ones would (and should). An exploit, is an exploit, local OR remote. Do you HONESTLY think people (such as those @ GOOGLE who work with one another) don't do this to one another?? Workplace espionage happens man...
----
"Another local DoS. And another, and another... Yawn." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
A security vulnerability is a security vulnerability. Local or not, you can take advantage of it, especially if a malware (or worse, a malscripted website's javascript does it, and that RUNS LOCALLY ON A USER'S MACHINE IN THEIR WEBBROWSER (or, is someone here going to tell me that javascript doesn't affect Linux? It can, because the DOM is the same in the webbrowsers used if they are multiplatform webbrowsers like Firefox for example)).
Now, you note "local exploit". Think that doesn't happen in the workplace, on the same local area network? It does, and once you "suck in" a malware (be it a binary executable OR malscripted page, guess where it's running?? Locally, NOT remotely!)
Things like ACL usage (MAC on SeLinux bearing distros, but NOT ALL LINUX DISTROS USE SeLinux or AppArmor either) can stall much of that, or ASRL + DEP do so on Windows (as well as Windows 7, VISTA, & Windows Server 2008 using "least privelege protections" as *NIX's do).
----
"Modifying video output could be very bad, but also very hard to exploit in a way to make it worse than rickrolling you. And again, local." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
See my last paragraph in reply above - same ideas apply here too.
----
"In other words, there's a race condition (hard to exploit) which may disclose sensitive information in your environment variables to other procesess you run. I honestly can't think of a single case where this would reveal anything exploitable. Clearly, it should be fixed, but right now, you're welcome to my environment variables." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
Which are just like what you'd need when you remotely "map out" a network (which IS what hacker/cracker types do, first, in gathering information)... it doesn't sound as if you've had any professional experiences in "pen testing" based on your replies here.
----
"That could be very, very bad, but also very difficult to exploit. Again, local." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Tuesday June 01, @02:09AM (#32415160)
Again: See my replies on "local exploits" above...
----
"So, in other words, anyone who uses an IDE CD-RW drive is vulnerable. Other
You can't zip up and send files
Files belong on a server, not on a user's desktop.
You can't receive and unzip files
Files belong on a server, not on a user's desktop.
You can't print
Why print when you have access to your document right on your iPad? For outgoing documents there is the central printserver your company should have already.
You can't connect any usb devices
Like the printer you don't need or the local storage you shouldn't have?
Useless encryption
Of what? The documents are safe on the encrypted server.
No decent audio/video/image editing
Yeah, that is bound to be a dealbreaker in the corporate world. Hold on guys, now we're hosed for good, as we can't remix our mp3's! Get real.
No Flash/Silverlight
Yes? This is a good thing, which you somehow try to spin as bad?
No Java Applets
Look at your calender, it's not 1992 anymore. When was the last time you saw an applet on the web? No fibbing now, really.
Heh, see subject-line above, first please - thanks!
In fact, I just commented to a user here about that -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1670694&cid=32419316 when he asked why I don't register here!
(It's MAINLY because of the 'hit & run downmodders' who recognize my posting style, & downmod my posts with regular frequency whether I am right or wrong... they do so, with NO technical justifications either (lame)).
Heck - I've even had the moderators here close threads way, Way, WAY earlier than usual when I was showing that one of their "pals" (cronies is more like it) was losing BADLY in a debate..
To verify this? See that URL above, it points right to it as an example thereof I put up to my fellow AC here who asked "why don't you register here?"...
(Heh, with BLATANTLY 'crooked mods' & trolls galore here? No thanks.)
Besides - I can beat the AC "10 posts per 24 hour timeframe" limits here imposed rather unfairly on us AC's anyhow, so, what on earth would I gain by being a registered user (other than being MORE EASILY TRACKED FOR TROLLING by my "stalker fanclub" here? Nothing! In fact, I make it harder on them to track me here is all, lol, by staying "unregistered" & posting as AC!)?
I will give you 1 thing though - at least YOU take the time to show that you know a thing or two on the subject of Personal Computer security, whereas, my "downmodding troll fanclub" here, usually never does (& I even provided recent evidences thereof of that fact too, no less, as evidence to that fact).
Anyhow/anyways - waiting on your rebuttals here -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1670694&cid=32416552 because it ought to be interesting, and at least YOU have the "good sense" to know that modern OS today can be secured far over their defaults & decently too!
APK
P.S.=> Again, @ least YOU have the technical saavy & know how to a decent extent to put up a good fight & give me a "run for my money" here in tech debates... many others? Well, see the above... apk
Exchange is $40K just in licenses for our employees. That doesn't count the enterprise license or the server to put it on. It doesn't count the AV license for it, or the managed service to prevent others from overwhelming it. It's not inexpensive.
We have remained on an old version of Enterprise because of this very reason... the CAL's are not upgradeable, you have to buy them all over again every time a new version comes out.
And no, software assurance is not the solution. All you're doing is spreading the cost over multiple years, you still have the enormous cost to pay.