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

Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

tales.fromprod.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 194 posts

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#131

Post by Arainach »

NewJazz wrote: post #127
ArnoVW wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is true, allow me to give another POV. I run corporate security and internal IT for a 100 person SaaS. I "nudge" our users towards Chrome. Why? Because I can manage Chrome using the config infrastructure provided by Google. Because Google has more resources to secure their browser. Because my observability and DLP stuff works with Chrome and not with Firefox. And I'm probably still missing out on a bunch o…

It's a pain that when you cannot do what you want to do. But it's not your laptop. It's the company's. But it is my craft, and to be limited to what tools I can use in my craft can decrease the value of my work, and in doing so decrease the company's productivity.

Let's say you earn a million dollars a year (most of us earn far less). At quite a few companies, a 50% decrease in your productivity (and changing browsers is nowhere near that) would cost the company significantly less than dealing with the fallout of any of the following:

* A user intentionally leaking sensitive documents outside the corporate network

* A user installing an infected browser extension that gives attackers access to corporate resources

* A user accessing malware or ransomware which infects corporate resources.

That's on top of the cost of having the IT department having to debug issues among users with bespoke tool sets which can often interact in unintuitive ways.

There are many stupid ways that companies "optimize" costs that cost them more in the end. Standardizing the browser and extension set for data loss protection is not one of them.

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#132

Post by jchw »

charcircuit wrote: post #128
jchw wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mean it would be physically impossible, which is hopefully implied, I mean, it would be de-facto impossible. Absent the perverse forces of anticompetitive behavior, browsers don't really have a good incentive to diminish the open nature of web standards by doing partnerships that bypass standards altogether. If you are not affiliated with Google and there is a healthy ecosystem of browsers, you just simply c…

>browsers don't really have a good incentive Why wouldn't money be an incentive. If businesses are willing to pay to have locked down browser access their cloud files, and the cloud file website wants to make money by charging businesses for this feature it makes sense that they may pay a browser to develop such a feature to use with their website.

I dunno, it just seems like the set of circumstances that would be needed to overcome the inherent friction in a "healthy" ecosystem is a lot more gymnastics than the current situation where the browser company with the vast majority of marketshare is the company that has conflicts of interest to fuck with the browser.

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#134

Post by nazgul17 »

remus wrote: post #121
flir wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My org (or rather, the org they pay to run their IT) blocked browser plugins with a security justification. I find this incredibly amusing, and at a different point in my life I'd already be gone. When you outsource IT, there are many, many misaligned incentives.

> I find this incredibly amusing, and at a different point in my life I'd already be gone. How so? Bad actors buying existing extensions with large user bases then publishing a new version which does bad stuff is a pretty common pattern. It certainy seems like a reasonable concern for a corp IT department.

Not GP, but I think the point was that no extensions => no ad blockers => major malware vehicle unlockable, short of disabling JS

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#135

Post by lokar »

makeitdouble wrote: post #123
insanitybit wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google offers "Managed Chrome" as a service. What would you like them to do, offer "Managed Firefox"? Should AWS offer "Managed GCP"?

Google offering "Managed Chrome" is probably the root issue. Call me old school, but wedging an already dominant browser to be the only full fledge option in GSuite using companies reeks anti-competition.

You don’t have to use managed chrome to use gsuite

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#136

Post by mbac32768 »

ArnoVW wrote: post #92
dijit wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it shouldn’t be an option. Some IT departments just see a “more secure” checkbox and will always check it, even if it doesn’t make sense holistically- sometimes compliance incentivises (or forces) this behaviour. A common example is forcing intune/device enrolment for mobile devices (including ipads)- but not for the infinitely less secure laptops: because no such endpoint enforcement checkbox exists

While this is true, allow me to give another POV. I run corporate security and internal IT for a 100 person SaaS. I "nudge" our users towards Chrome. Why? Because I can manage Chrome using the config infrastructure provided by Google. Because Google has more resources to secure their browser. Because my observability and DLP stuff works with Chrome and not with Firefox. And I'm probably still missing out on a bunch o…

This is the correct answer. Having your users run multiple browsers by default (instead of with whitelisted exceptions) is now multiple attack surfaces the org has to manage.

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#137

Post by lokar »

Macha wrote: post #40
saagarjha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is there a policy to require “Chrome” and not a policy to require another browser, hmm?

Because Google is able to configure Chrome to the admin's liking.

Yep, there are a lot of high risk settings, especially extensions

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#138

Post by eek2121 »

That's fine. The second I stopped caring, which is the day I stopped working for a living, I stopped worrying about what Google thinks. I don't use Google for email or search. (my email addresses are with proton, iCloud, and Hey, and my search is DDG) I'm not a big video person so I never use Youtube, the few times I need to use an office product I will either use OnlyOffice, or the Apple stuff. My Phone is an iPhone (with the stuff mentioned above) My browser is Firefox with uBlock Origin, and I almost never have problems with this setup.

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#139

Post by michaelt »

remus wrote: post #121
flir wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My org (or rather, the org they pay to run their IT) blocked browser plugins with a security justification. I find this incredibly amusing, and at a different point in my life I'd already be gone. When you outsource IT, there are many, many misaligned incentives.

> I find this incredibly amusing, and at a different point in my life I'd already be gone. How so? Bad actors buying existing extensions with large user bases then publishing a new version which does bad stuff is a pretty common pattern. It certainy seems like a reasonable concern for a corp IT department.

99% of security experts I know use ad blockers.

When there are unpatched browser vulnerabilities, attackers will use ad networks to inject attack code into reputable-but-ad-laden websites. And even when there aren't unpatched vulnerabilities out there, many ad networks will happily accept scam ads, ads that trick people into downloading malware, fake download buttons and suchlike.

Re: Google workspace threatening to block Firefox access

#140

Post by aaomidi »

lokar wrote: post #135
makeitdouble wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google offering "Managed Chrome" is probably the root issue. Call me old school, but wedging an already dominant browser to be the only full fledge option in GSuite using companies reeks anti-competition.

You don’t have to use managed chrome to use gsuite

I mean the issue here is Google using its dominant power to push for a specific browser within a security software they control.

This is a difference between America and Europe in mentality towards this.

Post reply on HN