Thursday, February 7, 2008

WTF is Google Thinking?

Google. The projects they do, the reactions they provoke, even the cooking in the cafeteria - whatever they do, almost always ends up being big. Unfortunately, with their latest "It seemed like a good idea at the time!" they're most likely about to piss of even more IT staff than when Google Desktop started copying files onto Google servers indiscriminately.

The description from the press release sounds innocuous enough:

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced Google Apps Team Edition as the simplest and fastest way for groups of employees and students to collaborate within an organization using Google Apps.

But then they go on:

Once users verify their business or school email address, they can instantly share documents and calendars securely without burdening IT for support.

ARS Technica had it right when they described this as Google trying to "sneak Team Edition suite past IT help desk". To those IT help desks Google is referring to, this is roughly like working to bring new an exciting drugs to market without burdening the FDA, or opening a new restaurant without burdening those poor health inspectors.

The problem is, Google is offering to host some set of end user data, but those end users quite simply lack the ability to evaluate whether or not Google is a suitable custodian of that data. Random end users shouldn't be expected to make those kinds of evaluations on their own. After all, why should an accountant worry about going over technical details of colocation and outsourcing details, such as key escrow management, encryption, etc, when you already have an IT department to worry about them?

In any decent sized company, this is how things are supposed to work. The business side of the house sets the priorities, then passes the goals and requirements off to the IT of the house, who picks the best solution on suitability and technical merit. Management sets the why and what, IT decides the how.

Google, on the other hand, appears to be trying to take that away. Now, I'll be the first to say that expanding the online Google tool suite is great. And adding in collaboration features is a pretty obvious next step.

But damnit all, Google has a responsibility to make sure this loaded gun is at least pointed in the right direction! If you want to sell liquor, fine - but that doesn't mean you should open up shop across the street from a high school. The last story that I heard of where users decided to go off and create a working solution on their own, the end results included an SSL free commerce web site and credit card numbers were tossed around in plain text email to be typed in. Collaboration definitely sounds like a powerful tool in the right hands, but IT still has to have a prominent role in picking which tool to use and how to use it.

Now I'm sure that the good folks at Google never intended to have sensitive data, like business plans or credit card numbers, passed around. The problem is, to an ordinary user, only moderately technically literate, the only difference between storing that top secret business plan on a secured server and Google docs is which bookmark they click on.

In a a managed corporate IT environment, the IT and business sides of the house have a close working relationship. The IT side understands enough of the business side to create a working system. At Boeing, the IT staff understand that plans for new airplanes are highly sensitive, and so can set up servers and encryption to protect it, and train users in how to use it to protect data. With Google, however, you get what they offer, and that's it. If Google apps doesn't meet your needs, you either end up with a hole that Google apps can't fill, or even worse, leaving data inadequately protected.

So the next time that someone who has no chance of understanding the implications of the fine print in the acceptable use policy goes off and leaks the company crown jewels by clicking the wrong checkbox in a Google app, will Google accept any of the blame? Or even more importantly, any of the responsibility of cleaning up the resulting mess? Tracing the extent of data leaks? Buying credit protection for identity theft victims?

Somehow I suspect that Google won't mind burdening the IT help desk with that half of the job.

No comments: