Re: Google Secure Access

tomstdenis@gmail.com wrote:
> arachnidster@gmail.com wrote:
> > I don't see the problem here, personally. This isn't designed to solve
> > the rogue AP problem, it's designed to solve the "somebody with another
> > wireless card can listen to everything I do" problem.
>
> That's not a real problem though as any half-ass competent shop will
> have their own VPN. And if you can't sort out VPN then an SSH server
> with -D SOCKS is just as easy.

As I was trying to say, any 'half-ass competent shop' won't need this
service. Your semi-tech-literate next-door neighbour that wants to
connect with wifi somewehere will. He doesn't have someone to set up a
VPN for himself, and has nowhere to set up an SSH tunnel to. His
concern is people packetsniffing his email password (for example),
which this solves neatly.

> > I certainly wouldn't trust anything particularaly vital to them, but
> > that's when you start using your own measures, like your own VPN,
> > instead.
>
> If you can't trust your own employees...

Huh?

Jeffrey F. Bloss wrote:
> Or is it Google capitalizing on a problem to secure even more of the market
> share? Are you in fact trading the threat of someone eavesdropping on your
> wireless for the certainty that Google will?
>
> Sure you are...

_Perhaps_ Google is datamining all the traffic that goes through this
gateway. Personally, I doubt it, but it's irrelevant anyway: this
service is here for people who are concerned that someone is going to
packet-sniff your email password or other personal information, not
people who are concerned their traffic is being datamined.

I seriously doubt Google cares what my IMAP password is.

nobody@firenze.linux.it wrote:
> You forget google's penchant for archiving absolutely EVERYTHING they can
> get their grubby little paws on.
>
> Google is NOT to be trusted.

I'm not aware of instances of Google archiving anything other than
publicly available information. What use would they have for it anyway?
Received on Thu Sep 29 21:58:26 2005