Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

Summary: The city of Los Angeles is losing patience with the rollout of Google Apps, specifically with the delay in meeting the security concerns of the LAPD.

Everyone knew that the stakes were high when the city of Los Angeles voted to “Go Google” and move its email system to the cloud.

Los Angeles, being the first out on that Google Apps limb, would be under watch. Google, which had been touting the cost-savings and efficiency of its online productivity software, already had its critics. Even cloud computing, which was disrupting traditional computing business models, was still considered a scary unknown world. So, this was certainly a deal that was under a big microscope.

Today, those stakes are even higher for all parties involved as the Great Los Angeles Google Experiment finds itself back in the spotlight - and not in a good way.

City council member Dennis Zine, who filed a motion requesting an update on the Google transition, told the Wall Street Journal that he feels like Google sold him a bill of goods that it didn’t deliver. The deal between Google and Los Angeles, reached in October 2009, called for all 30,000 employees to be transitioned to the Google system by the end of June 2010.

But that didn’t happen. The police department had raised concerns about Google’s data encryption, its ability to segregate city data from other other data managed by Google and about background checks for Google employees who would have access to police department information. That prompted delays. But now, more than 15 months later, patience at City Hall is wearing thin with these delays.

For good reason.

It’s not unreasonable to think that the transition would be complete after two years. And certainly, Google is anxious to see it completed, as well. Bit It’s unclear whether the delay is a case of Google selling something that it failed to deliver, as the council member suggested, or an instance of Los Angeles asking for more after the handshake.

The WSJ report quoted Google and its implementation partner as saying that the city identified new security requirements for its law enforcement division - which has about 13,000 employees - after the deal was reached.

For what it’s worth, the other 17,000 city employees have already been transitioned and a city official said that Google’s email product is “working well for the majority of the city’s workforce.”

Back in April 2010, before the first deadline was missed, Los Angeles CTO Randi Levin spoke to reporters during a lunch roundtable at Google’s headquarters. Then, she was an advocate for the cloud model, calling the cost-savings a “no-brainer,” but recognized that it faced its share of critics. At the time, I wrote:

As a city official, Levin spoke carefully - but was also frank. The cost savings was a no-brainer. At $50 per user per year, the city is saving $5 million in cash but $20 million overall, when all factors are considered. For example, with its old system, the city had no disaster recovery system in place. With Google, the city now gets that protection.

So why was the decision such a heated battle? She didn’t have to think twice about her answer. Fears and myths over the cloud - from the security of the data to the reliability and stability of it - caused politicians and city leaders to have a lot of reservations.

Clearly, those concerns remain today.

That’s where the pressure falls back on Google and the cloud. Google needs to find a way to address the security concerns of the LAPD if it expects any other municipality - or large company - to buy into its cloud model down the road. Whether this is a case of Los Angeles changing the rules of the game or Google falling short doesn't seem to matter.

What's more important is how it gets resolved. And when.

Related:

Topics: Data Centers, Collaboration, Google

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

29 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Just throw it out and move to Office365 like all the other people who

    went with google apps and regretted it and tossed it. They all report Office365 is 1000x better and it doesnt cost any more.
    Johnny Vegas
    • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

      @Johnny Vegas

      I don't have a lot of customers that went with Google Apps but after 6 months they were looking for something else and the ones that changed to Office365 are much happier now.
      mswift@...
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    3 things come to mind:

    1) There are a lot of us that could say "we told you so" when this project began... Not just with the Cloud, the same can be said for BYOD, or deploying fad devices like the iPad, just because some exec wants one. Nevermind security, management, or TCO implications; "Let's deploy the latest fad/ technology, then after the fact figure out how to tailor it so we can actually make it useful."

    2) If it's a case of City of LA "asking for more after the handshake"... then they have no cause for complaint. Google can and should say "this is what we agreed upon, for this price, at this deadline... if you want more or less after the fact, you don't have the right to complain. If you have concerns about security, you should have listened to your the SecAud and SecSys teams when they voiced concerns 6 months before you signed the dotted line. And, if they never voiced concerns, you should fire them because they didn't know what they were doing in the first place."

    3) If the CTO for the City of LA had that kind of budget before hand - whether she was saving $5 or $20 Million - there's no excuse for not having redundancy. A lot of companies do a lot more with a lot less. It has always seemed like, and continues to seem like the wrong decision maker was involved in the final decision. (again, we go back to... "but iPads are cool, we definitely have to deploy them regardless of the implications")
    UrNotPayingAttention
    • Biggest Problem in LA

      @chmod 777 <br>"We want it by spending no money until it breaks then we will escalate by pointing fingers and holding press conferences....."<br><br>Lived here for 12 years now and have seen no change from the above stated model.....<br><br>lmao!!!!
      rhonin
    • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

      @chmod 777 So this has nothing to do with Apple or the Ipad, but since you're just an Apple hater you had to throw that out there??? You just lost any, no matter how little it was of credibility in your comments...
      Rapid Rec
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    Never a good idea to hire an advertising company for an IT job.

    Come to think of it, it's never a good idea to use an advertising company.

    ;-)
    tonymcs@...
  • Wanna bet...

    they end up with Office 365?
    MSFTWorshipper
    • Maybe

      @MSFTWorshipper
      in 2020.... it will take them that long to make their minds up ;)
      rhonin
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    No schmidt sherlock, saw this coming from the start... ;)
    straycat5678
    • As Cartman would say: Waaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh

      @straycat5678 They'll be back to Microsoft Office soon!
      otaddy
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    http://skrt.pl/wb
    sdkgei
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    To be fair, Office 365 wasn't available in 2009 and you'd be a fool to go with BPOS. I commend them for being relatively forward thinking.

    That said, being early is the same thing as being wrong. Randi Levin should have asked herself, "Why is this so cheap?" She could have gotten rid of email altogether and saved even MORE money -- a no-brainer if you will.
    Rich Miles
    • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

      @Rich Miles
      I now have 4 clients on BPOS with no issues. Most of the problems are due to user or configuration settings. If you take the time to understand what you are doing and why, things generally work. Hitting next, next, next, reboot doesn't always work for installs.
      psymth@...
    • That's your best argument?

      @Rich Miles

      Office 2010 wasn't available in 2009 either. BPOS was the best hosted solution for email and collaboration at the time. For users of Office 2007, it was really the only option available.
      Joe_Raby
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    http://skrt.pl/wb
    sdkgei
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    The days are not looking good for Google. This is a huge setback for them and their Google Apps. I would never use or recommend it anyway but now people have more reason not to go with it.
    LoverockDavidson_-24231404894599612871915491754222
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    I'm no major fan of Google, but the city of LA can't enter into an agreement with Google, then change the security concerns for 13,000 people after the agreement and expect the same results. Had the city been forthcoming about the security concerns ahead of time and Google still promised them the same time frame, that would be one thing, but that doesn't appear to be the case in this.
    swmace
    • Too True

      @swmace
      This is unfortunately a business process they have done repeatedly and not in just this arena. :(
      rhonin
    • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

      @swmace Doesn't really matter when the security expectations were raised. Fact of the matter is that Google can't meet the security requirements, plain and simple.
      bigsibling
  • RE: Dark clouds in L.A. as Google Apps faces city's security concerns

    The $50 per user/year is a misleading number.
    Any Governement entity must be able to answer to public record requests and must be able to search emails company wide.
    This requires the Postini archiving module that comes at an additional cost.
    LA CTO lied on the real cost of going to the cloud or Google gave them a deal that they do not give to others.
    PhilDuf