Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google ditches Windows on security concerns

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 158 posts

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#71

Post by ori_b »

andreyf wrote: post #38
ori_b wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9129978/Researcher_cr... Mac isn't significantly more secure. In fact, after all the bad press, Microsoft has invested significant amounts of money on intrusion mitigation systems like address space randomization, non-executable stacks, and so on. Linux is playing catch up to Windows in some regards there, and from what I know about OSX, it's also far behind in intrusion mitigat…

Uh, citation, please? You liked to an article that says "there once existed a vulnerability in Safari" and then right away claimed that Linux and OSX are "still catching up to" Windows in terms of security. Now, I want to believe you, but it sounds to me like you're speaking with a little too much conviction relative to the evidence you're presenting.

One citation, describing flaws in the current implementations.

http://web.archive.org/web/20080111062141/http://www.matasan...

Another (fairly poorly written) article about it: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hack-windows-security-snow-...

I'm sure you can find more if you dig around.

Also, non-executable stack has been supported OSX since it was shipped, but non-executable heap is new. I believe (I'm not sure) that non-executable stack is also disabled fairly often because of trampolines in GCC.

Security in OSX isn't broken, of course, but the mitigation measures are strongest in Windows, out of the mainstream OSes these days.

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#72

Post by brown9-2 »

jrockway wrote: post #25
samstokes wrote: post #17

"Getting a new Windows machine now requires CIO approval," said another employee. I really hope that's quoted out of context (e.g. maybe it's really getting a second machine, regardless of OS, that requires CIO approval?). I doubt we're getting the whole story here. I'm sure there are everyday tasks that can be done more effectively on Windows (I've been Linux-only for a couple of years now, so I can't imagine what t…

This is how big companies work. They want even the smallest task (like, "viewing documentation for the product we just bought") to take days and require multiple levels of managerial approval. Because I guess it's cheaper to have 10 employees doing the same job than it is to get sued if one employee posts confidential information to a blog, or something. (If you've ever wondered why you only get 0.00025% interest on…

who do you think runs Google - the programmers or the IT staff?

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#73

Post by aidenn0 »

johngunderman wrote: post #67
dejb wrote: post #37

The danger here is that they will lose touch with the 80% of their user base that uses windows. If they don't have enough people who intimately understand the computing experience of their users then their products could suffer.

they are not saying that they are getting rid of all windows machines full stop, they are saying that none of their employers can use windows machines as their dev machine / work machines. They don't want to expose any private data to the windows machines. They certainly will keep around some windows boxen for testing purposes.

Big difference between "I'm gonna mess around on this windows box for an hour or two a day to see what it's like to use" and "this is my machine and it runs windows"

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#74

Post by sjs »

dejb wrote: post #37

The danger here is that they will lose touch with the 80% of their user base that uses windows. If they don't have enough people who intimately understand the computing experience of their users then their products could suffer.

You mean intimately understanding feelings of frustration and annoyance?

ducks

Seriously though, I'm sure that the folks who are allowed to use Windows are exactly the ones who need it: Picasa and Chrome devs (and the other desktop apps they have).

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#75

Post by [deleted] »

samstokes wrote: post #17

"Getting a new Windows machine now requires CIO approval," said another employee. I really hope that's quoted out of context (e.g. maybe it's really getting a second machine, regardless of OS, that requires CIO approval?). I doubt we're getting the whole story here. I'm sure there are everyday tasks that can be done more effectively on Windows (I've been Linux-only for a couple of years now, so I can't imagine what t…

[deleted]

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#77

Post by microkid »

jimbokun wrote: post #68
yummyfajitas wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this move may prevent infection by FR33_PR0N.wmv.exe, I don't see how it will prevent being hacked by China (the major concern).

I believe the Chinese government has Windows source code, and Google does not. The Darwin and BSD layers of Mac OS X are open source, so Google can at least study the code to understand the security implications of using OS X. In other words, with open source Google is on a more level playing field against potential attackers.

No offense, but level playing field is ridiculous.

Think about what you're saying, you're saying Google is going to sit there and review all of the source code, and all patches and new releases to that source code. Really? Do you actually believe this...

As per China having the source, do you really think it matters? If someone wants to break in, they're going to get in... (regardless if its Windows/Linux/Mac) why... because that's their job and they are going to spend every minute of every day until they figure it out, and that's what makes them better than you. Majority of the time the issue is not software itself, but the policies in place. Hell, why even break in technically, when I can probably call one of these 10,000 employees up and they'll give me their password. Duh.

If you believe security is 1-dimensional, then you are bound to fail. History has shown this time and time again, just read a book / biography in regards to this topic.

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#78

Post by w1ntermute »

zmmmmm wrote: post #44
samstokes wrote: post #17

"Getting a new Windows machine now requires CIO approval," said another employee. I really hope that's quoted out of context (e.g. maybe it's really getting a second machine, regardless of OS, that requires CIO approval?). I doubt we're getting the whole story here. I'm sure there are everyday tasks that can be done more effectively on Windows (I've been Linux-only for a couple of years now, so I can't imagine what t…

> I'd speculate this is more about politics, or dogfooding Agree on the dogfooding. I think Google is planning a major attack on Microsoft's business / office empire. They have made it so simple to set up a new business using Google apps that it's almost unthinkable to me that I would go out and do an exchange setup. But this is largely still in stealth mode because Google wants to bring its business apps up to the p…

There's a major flaw in your logic - Google has already begun a major attack on Apple, but they're still allowing OS X on their campus.

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#79

Post by pook »

microkid wrote: post #77
jimbokun wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the Chinese government has Windows source code, and Google does not. The Darwin and BSD layers of Mac OS X are open source, so Google can at least study the code to understand the security implications of using OS X. In other words, with open source Google is on a more level playing field against potential attackers.

No offense, but level playing field is ridiculous. Think about what you're saying, you're saying Google is going to sit there and review all of the source code, and all patches and new releases to that source code. Really? Do you actually believe this... As per China having the source, do you really think it matters? If someone wants to break in, they're going to get in... (regardless if its Windows/Linux/Mac) why...…

More importantly but less vociferously, by Google switching to an open source OS, it means anyone, anywhere, can fix vulnerabilities. Not just Google.

Considering the difficulty of patching security holes in proprietary software versus patching holes in open software, Google indeed would hugely benefit by drastically reducing the difference between the cost of defense and the cost of cracking.

It's not so much levelling the playing field, as removing Harrison Bergeron's buckshot-filled equality harness.

Re: Google ditches Windows on security concerns

#80

Post by hamedh »

dejb wrote: post #37

The danger here is that they will lose touch with the 80% of their user base that uses windows. If they don't have enough people who intimately understand the computing experience of their users then their products could suffer.

i'm sure they would still run windows under virtualization with vmware fusion, etc. they would still would have to do very heavy testing of IE on their apps, so that would be the easiest way to do it. i don't think google can escape the suffering of writing for IE just yet
Post reply on HN