End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit • Hacker News Board

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#41

Post by gopher_space » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:08 PM UTC

stavros wrote: post #11

quantadev wrote: post #9

Never hitch your wagon to somebody else's horse. Entire companies have been destroyed because they rely on Amazon, Google, or some other service, and then have the rug pulled. Sometimes companies have even been destroyed, notably by Amazon, for having the wrong political viewpoints. My rule of thumb is: Only use open source components, and only run my stuff on Linux. So that way I maintain full control over my stack,…

Some of these wagons only managed to move because they were hitched to someone else's horse.

My concern is that people aren't building their own horses the minute it becomes feasible. The farrier now seems mystical and occult to a generation even though they're more than capable of picking up the tools themselves.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#42

Post by rammer » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:08 PM UTC

davedx wrote: post #5

> But then… a couple of months later, Google completely removed the option for us to scan our own code. Instead, to keep access to Google Drive, we would now have to pay one of Google’s business partners to conduct the review. What a racket. Smells downright anti-competitive The EU will have fun with this when it catches up.

It wasn't even that expensive. Ada security audit from tekta in Spain was under 4k.

There's nothing like a racket here. The list of certification agencies goes from KPMG at top end to smaller companies.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#43

Post by t0mas88 » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:09 PM UTC

dewey wrote: post #10

Even the "audit" they require for increasing something simple as your YouTube API quota is already annoying and a massive waste of time, and this is not even close to the one they are requiring from Panic. The quota increase process is roughly: 1) Fill out the same form every year from scratch 2) Send it into the black hole that's Google "support" 3) A few weeks later receive a reply from someone asking a irrelevant…

The Google "support" black hole even exists for their high budget ad customers. I've seen a case where things went into the Google support black hole for a company spending a few million per month via DV360 / Google Ads. Nothing anyone could do about it, campaign blocked, work with "support" to fix it.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#44

Post by IncreasePosts » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:10 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #29

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #24

I wrote this response to another front page HN article on a similar topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41664753 I know everyone loves to dunk on Google, and I definitely agree their communication and customer service to app developers is shite, but this change to permissions scope is a good thing. If you have full, unfettered access to large number of people's Google Drive data, you're a huge target for male…

> If you can't afford the new audit requirements ... then I'd really question your ability to appropriately safeguard so much critically private data. Because large companies that can afford it have proven to be exemplars at safeguarding private data?

Like google? Yes, I think so. Probably one of the best track records among big tech, so maybe their security practices should carry more weight?

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#45

Post by MobiusHorizons » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:11 PM UTC

StarterPro wrote: post #34

ianlevesque wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's relevant that Transmit is a local native app . There's no hosted app exposed to the internet to hack here. Google made one lengthy process that doesn't fit this use case.

If they are connecting to Google Drive, is that not connected to the internet?

exposed to the internet and connected to the internet are different. Exposed implies that traffic originating from the internet reaches the app. You still do have to worry about things like parsing malicious files, but the class of relevant attacks is much smaller and generally easier to defend against.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#46

Post by AlexandrB » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:11 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #24

I wrote this response to another front page HN article on a similar topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41664753 I know everyone loves to dunk on Google, and I definitely agree their communication and customer service to app developers is shite, but this change to permissions scope is a good thing. If you have full, unfettered access to large number of people's Google Drive data, you're a huge target for male…

Google's not my dad. It's not their responsibility (or their place) to audit every piece of software I use to interact with their services. I'm tired of being treated like a child who needs every sharp corner ground down for my safety.

Edit: Next logical step is auditing every IMAP client before you can connect it to Gmail. Ridiculous.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#47

Post by jll29 » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:12 PM UTC

kyleee wrote: post #15

dewey wrote: post #10

Even the "audit" they require for increasing something simple as your YouTube API quota is already annoying and a massive waste of time, and this is not even close to the one they are requiring from Panic. The quota increase process is roughly: 1) Fill out the same form every year from scratch 2) Send it into the black hole that's Google "support" 3) A few weeks later receive a reply from someone asking a irrelevant…

The process is the punishment

That's a diamond of a quote; are you a student of Kafka's?

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#48

Post by 8338550bff96 » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:13 PM UTC

dewey wrote: post #10

Even the "audit" they require for increasing something simple as your YouTube API quota is already annoying and a massive waste of time, and this is not even close to the one they are requiring from Panic. The quota increase process is roughly: 1) Fill out the same form every year from scratch 2) Send it into the black hole that's Google "support" 3) A few weeks later receive a reply from someone asking a irrelevant…

Have the same experience with Microsoft support. The difference is the timeline is much shorter and when our issues don't get any traction our rep intervenes and escalates to engineers.

I understand that level-1 support for these orgs are basically documentation librarians. Cool. We pay an incredible amount for premium support, but whatever. It's fine. What matters is that we have a rep that is engaged and cares about us being unblocked and isn't going to let us flounder for issues their support team is not going to solve. Have never seen this level of commitment from Google.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#49

Post by anakaine » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:13 PM UTC

rammer wrote: post #42

davedx wrote: post #5

> But then… a couple of months later, Google completely removed the option for us to scan our own code. Instead, to keep access to Google Drive, we would now have to pay one of Google’s business partners to conduct the review. What a racket. Smells downright anti-competitive The EU will have fun with this when it catches up.

It wasn't even that expensive. Ada security audit from tekta in Spain was under 4k. There's nothing like a racket here. The list of certification agencies goes from KPMG at top end to smaller companies.

4k is not expensive in enterprise terms, but in small bootstrapped startup terms it is absolutely expensive.

Re: End of the road for Google Drive in Transmit

#50

Post by stavros » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 8:13 PM UTC

gopher_space wrote: post #41

stavros wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of these wagons only managed to move because they were hitched to someone else's horse.

My concern is that people aren't building their own horses the minute it becomes feasible. The farrier now seems mystical and occult to a generation even though they're more than capable of picking up the tools themselves.

You don't build things when it becomes feasible, you build things when it becomes less risky to build them than to not.

For things like a convenience integration, that moment may never come. For other things, it's easy to estimate wrong, given how fuzzy the risks are.