Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
Summary: A Washington-based privacy group wants the Federal Trade Commission to launch an investigation of the cloud-computing services offered by Google - including Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar and others - to ensure that they are as secure as Google promises they will be.Specifically, the matters stems from reports earlier this month that a software bug in Google Docs publicly exposed documents believed to be private.
A Washington-based privacy group wants the Federal Trade Commission to launch an investigation of the cloud-computing services offered by Google - including Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar and others - to ensure that they are as secure as Google promises they will be.
Specifically, the matters stems from reports earlier this month that a software bug in Google Docs publicly exposed documents believed to be private. The company said the glitch affected one-half of one percent of the documents stored online.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center pointed out in its petition to the FTC that Google uses language in its marketing statements that suggest to users that their documents are safe and secure and that users can "rest assured that your documents, spreadsheets and presentations will remain private unless you publish them to the Web or invite collaborators and/or viewers."
The group cites other security breach incidents involving Google, though none since January 2007, when a security flaw involving Google Desktop was found. The group notes that the matter becomes critical because cloud computing services are growing in popularity among both consumers and businesses, greatly increasing the potential for risk.
Google said the Google Docs problem earlier this month occurred in cases where people had chosen to collaborate on multiple documents and adjusted settings to allow access to others. Collaborators were unintentionally given permission to access documents aside from the ones intended.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
It's still a long long way...
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
If the Electronic Privacy Information Center is so worried...
(a) not use Google cloud services; or
(b) look into it with their own money, not
ours.
Nobody forces people to use Google mostly's
FREE
services, and nobody has a right to expect them
to be
perfect.
Why should the government stick its nose in
Google's
business and waste taxpayer money figuring out
how
good or not good the services are?
Let people read a couple of blogs or try out
the
services and decide for themselves.
Maybe someone should investigate the Electronic
Privacy Yenta Center regarding why they are
invading
Google's privacy and wasting taxpayer money.
Who are
these (probably tax funded) malcontents? Don't
we
have enough real things to deal with in life?
While this seems targeted I disagree in general....
Laissez-faire isn't going to work. Reading a couple of blogs and trying out the services is not going to tell you whats actually happening in the background. And if no one if enforcing any rules on your behalf they WILL do what ever makes the most money for them.
I just can't understand how many times companies have to get caught doing stuff like selling rotten meat treated with carbon monoxide before people catch on to the fact that the individual is actually powerless. People always THINK they are shopping "smart" and are so informed but honestly don't know the half of it. I guess were doomed to being poisoned by the Chinese smh.
Government oversight? pffffft!
Example: The public, and the government, became concerned about MSG a few years back. So, the industry came up with a few dozen other names for the same stuff, stuck them on the label, some even claiming "No MSG", and actually increased the quantity of MSG in processed foods.
example
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
Aw c'mon, there have only been a few security breaches (reported)...
That may only be the tip of the iceberg
Don't forget...
Who knows, maybe it's time government here and elsewhere in the world put consequences for companies (and themselves) in place for security lapses/breaches etc. I for one would feel a little happier if a company who let my data out into the wild had something to "look forward to" in terms of a penalty/compensation etc.
Common sense to EPIC, "Well, duh!"
Storing your confidential data on *someone else's* servers isn't safe? Who would have suspected that?
Oh, yeah, everybody.
Come on EPIC, catch up with common sense. If you post it on-line, it's no longer private and there isn't any possible way that Google (or *anyone* else) can make it so.
If EPIC wants to b*tch about something, how about all that TJ Max customer credit card data that got stolen and that TJM hasn't done anything about?
There have been lots of high-impact high-dollar-volume transgressions to complain about ... and somehow GoogleDocs just doesn't worry me as much.
Regards,
Jon
RE: Privacy group to FTC: Google's cloud is unsafe
Thank you, Google, for a magnificent concept and business idea!
Robert Tjon
Will be? Why bother? What about others????!!!!
could care less about "will be". What about
Microsoft's cloud? or Adobe's?
Seems this is done by a competitor, and being pushed
for bad reasons.
Don't berate Google for stupid users!
is really not Google's issue. We don't want public
computing reduced to the lowest common ability.
Here in the UK the government and their contractors
regularly lose sensitive personal data files in
accessible forms, and I bet this goes on in the
'States too.
Nothing is perfect, especially when it is changing.
But Google tries hard. Do no evil.
Stupid users?
Second, your argument for data loss being allowable is a non-sequitur: my country has crappy security thus Google should be allowed to as well.
Thirdly, the last I checked "tries hard" isn't quite the same as "executes well". Trying to do no evil isn't the same as doing no evil.
Lastly, blaming "stupid users" is the first excuse of poor software development. It also doesn't work very well when all your users are "stupid": something which is very likely to be the case when making a public application.
What a bunch of boneheads!
That is why pirates used to say, "Dead men tell no tales."
I repeat
For example, if i found a critical vulnerability in Google, then the best chance to be fixed is to made the vulnerability public and create a mess about it.