Feeds

back to article Swedish watchdog: Google's chocolate cloud? Nej, not private

The Google bods who sell the ad giant's software services in Europe have been banned from flogging their wares to Sweden's public sector due to unresolved privacy concerns. The ruling came after a local council was prohibited from using Mountain View's cloud services, and applies to Sweden's local and central government, though …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Silver badge
Stop

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

You didn't read the article, did you?

This is not about the NSA. The decision came early last week - no idea how come el Reg is so damn late with this story. This is about Google's terms and conditions which translated out of happyhappyjoyjoy marketing and dense legalese say "Any data you put on our servers, we own. Also, fuck you".

Open source, closed source, source made of magic unicorns by Jonny Ive, doesn't matter. If T&Cs say the host owns whatever it stores, this is contrary to various national laws, EU legislation and the UK's very own oft-ignored but still sharp-toothed Data Protection Act.

Clouds suck. All clouds, whoever is hosting them.

(This also implies that the future is not mobile unless that future is not cloud based; so much for "death of the PC").

16
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

There is a difference between the NSA (or other spooks and wiretappers) and Google.

The NSA don't care about your LolCat fetish, or how often you buy the latest gadgets - so long as you aren't embedding secret messages in the former, or sending the latter to training camps in unsettled parts of the world - that's all so much fluff that gets in the way of their shadowy activities.

Google on the other hand are just waiting to the moment a entrepeneur starts selling USB hubs in the shape of a mournful cat holding a sign saying "I haz paw-ts" and then it'll sell you on for a few cents.

3
1
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: LolCat training camps

Are they training the cats or the people taking the photos?

2
0
Joke

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

Eadon, what you still do not understand is that FOSS' major deficiency is a lack of monetary transaction. When there flows no money, how would the decisionmaker have their bathroom renovated and the next yacht tour paid for ? I am asking you very seriously, do you want to remove all the grease from the wheels of our magnificent system ???

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

Obviously under an open source model we would all contribute to renovating the politicians home and taking them on holiday.

Anybody know where I can get a bulldozer and Theresa May's address?

Then Richard Stallman can take Margaret Beckett on a caravan holiday

4
0
Silver badge
Linux

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

"When there flows no money, how would the decisionmaker have their bathroom renovated and the next yacht tour paid for ?"

Why not ask companies like Red Hat, SUSE and Canonical that question? They seem to be doing ok. Granted, Canonical's business model might be a bit on the nose for many of its users at the moment, but the company doesn't seem to be suffering too much for it.

There are ways of making money with open source. If there weren't, how long do you think it would continue to exist?

1
1
Silver badge
Holmes

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

You didn't read the article, did you?

Eadon's not unlike aManFromMars, being triggered by particular words in the article, no matter their syntactical relation. The difference however is that aManFromMars does not appear to try to make sense, while Eadon does appear to try and fails miserably every time.

EADON FAIL.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Closed Source Software == security risk of espionage (confidentiality violation)

I'd counter that amanfromMars deliberately tries not to make sense.

1
0
Silver badge

@dogged

Dogged got his teeth into that one, couldn't agree more.

From the article: "...or looking for another way to deliver IT services". If the Board insists on the word "cloud", give 'em OwnCloud, which works great but rather nullifies the whole point of cloud, and bespoke applications would perform and scale better...

0
0
Bronze badge

Risk assessment.

Obviously we all do our own risk assessment on freeware compared to paid services.

Things get a bit harder when authorities have to decide what s what for their students.

.

0
0
Silver badge

Just right. The privacy concerns override any possible cost cutting advantages.

5
1
Stop

Maybe you goo$hills can find some more juicy exploits on Windows and maybe you even find a way to channel it to somebody who will do something nasty with that ? Now that they have detonated a nuke in your cloud, you really have to avenge the damage.

I have a large sack of popcorn here and I yearn for more games !

0
4
Thumb Up

If only UK authorities were as on the ball prior to the last census.

I still feel whoever was responsible for turning that data over to a foreign defense contractor and by proxy any branch of the US government that wants a peek should face treason charges.

Hopefully one of the positives from all the recent press attention will be that data protection will be far more seriously considered when outsourcing. Which from what I can tell should rule out any US providers due to the patriot act and its your data is now ours provisions.

3
0
Silver badge

LM provided the system for the 2001 census as well, don't you know?

So it's been going on a while.

0
0

Was not aware of that, since every party has an obsession with outsourcing everything to the lowest bidder I really do despair.

Seemingly no common sense applied to how contracts are awarded by the UK government and that's been the case for decades so can't blame the current lot. Only way some of these deals including the census make sense is if there are some hefty brown envelopes changing hands.

Why don't our watchdogs ever speak up until far too late? The recent uproar over Huwai and UK telecoms is a prime example of someone doing there job only far too late.

Slightly jealous that the Swedes at least have some parts of the government actually protecting them.

0
0

I refused to take part

For the reason that the British government was spending British tax payers money on paying an American company to provide data on all British households to the Americans.

Nothing came of that refusal despite the dire warnings about court proceedings etc.

I think I was entirely right, and think anyone who complied with that ridiculous census was stupid.

The British government should be spending British tax payers money on British companies and British workers - every time it spends our money.

1
0

Great Job, Sweden!

I just hope other countries have the balls to follow suit.

The loss of public sector contracts hurts and is a blow for Google's image. That's the only language that global companies understand. While the EU knows already that it doesn't like Google's use of personal data, it is just too bloody slow in making a decision.

Sweden has done the right thing by setting an example. Well done!

9
2
Silver badge

http://www.heise.de/ct/schlagseite/2012/10/gross.jpg

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.