back to article Breaking up is hard to do: Airbus, new bae Google and clinging on to Microsoft's 'solutions'

Airbus won't eradicate Microsoft Office from its entire user base after all it seems: the Defence, Space and Helicopters units will retain the on-premises version due to the "legal and national security implications" of storing sensitive data in the cloud. As revealed by The Register on 14 March, Airbus will start shifting its …

  1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

    La-La-Land

    So... how do you prevent leaks of restricted from on-prem to cloud while permitting the movement of material which is legally allowed to cross the boundary.

    The complexity of that alone should defeat any gains from cloudifying.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: La-La-Land

      E-mail sounds like a likely vector. But then this is probably already the case…

    2. TRT Silver badge

      Re: La-La-Land

      And you can't bring cloud on-prem?

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        Re: La-La-Land

        The quotes sound like they're selling this much too hard internally. More Google Cool Aid, or next-job-itis?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "And you can't bring cloud on-prem?"

        Not with Google.

      3. jelabarre59 Silver badge

        Re: La-La-Land

        And you can't bring cloud on-prem?

        They could, just not with G Suite. They could build an in-house OwnCloud setup, and run the cloud-enabled version of LibreOffice under it. Mail and chat, well that's probably workable too, just don't know much about it (if Ignatious were here he'd probably make some plug for CitadelUX).

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Presumably Airbus have quite a strict document classification system?

      As in try to work on a restricted document that either i) you have no permission to access or ii) outside of specific premises (or even closed off network within premises) and you’re out? The only attack vector for Airbus’s most sensitive material should really be spiked patches. Of course, if they really want to keep such data safe, they could always follow George RR Martin’s approach and use a computer too bloody old for t’internet (and Wordstar).

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's not that we hate Microsoft, it's Microsoft hates its Windows and Office users!

    They hate users so much, they slurp all the data they can get, they try harder and harder, and even then the backslash is little and en mass people still use them.

    Maybe we should make it not that hard for them to get rid of their users. /s

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's not that we hate Microsoft, it's Microsoft hates its Windows and Office users!

      "They hate users so much, they slurp all the data they can get, they try harder and harder, and even then the backslash is little and en mass people still use them."

      They are amateurs at data slurping compared to Google and because of that people hate Google more.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's not that we hate Microsoft, it's Microsoft hates its Windows and Office users!

        Be that as it may.

        It's Google's job to do at least some slurping for the business model as an advertiser and giving away lots of "free" features.

        Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser, it has no obvious business model to slurp or watch my online behaviours and therefore should not be doing so. That is supposed to be one of the benefits of paying arm+leg for their "services".

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser"

          Unluckily, Microsoft *was* not supposed to be an advertiser - Satan Nadella changed course, and decide MS has to go after the slurping business model of Google, although they're still amateurs for lack of experience and skills in slurping operations, more even so in the marketing side to make you believe they slurp in your own interest.

          IMHO, it was utterly silly to move towards slurping operations, because they removed one advantage they had over Google. Letting customers to decide if the wanted to run on-site IT operations or offload them to cloud services (or even a mix of two) depending on actual needs would have been more appealing.

          But it looks Nadella is able only to try to copy someone else's successful business, be it Google slurping, Amazon cloud, or Apple app store.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Corporate Windows 10 versions don't have Slurp capability

              Course they don't!

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Corporate Windows 10 versions don't have Slurp capability

                "Course they don't!"

                See http://www.hipaaone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/HIPAA-Compliance-Microsoft-Windows-10.pdf

                There is some capability but it's set to base / minimal by default.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser"

            "IMHO, it was utterly silly to move towards slurping operations, because they removed one advantage they had over Google. Letting customers to decide if the wanted to run on-site IT operations or offload them to cloud services..."

            Microsoft doesn't slurp their business customers, only consumers. For instance Corporate Windows 10 versions don't have Slurp capability enabled by default.

            1. PNGuinn
              Devil

              Re: "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser"

              "Microsoft doesn't slurp their business customers, only consumers. For instance Corporate Windows 10 versions don't have Slurp capability enabled by default."

              Yet.

              As far as we know.

            2. oldcoder

              Re: "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser"

              "For instance Corporate Windows 10 versions don't have Slurp capability enabled by default."

              As far as you can tell...

          3. PNGuinn
            Trollface

            Re: "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser"

            "But it looks Nadella is able only to try to copy someone else's successful business, be it Google slurping, Amazon cloud, or Apple app store."

            So - come back Monkey Boy, all is forgiven?

            At least he was a barrel of laughs in comparison.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's Google's job

          The AC Google apologist in full effect, as usual.

          It's Google's job to spy on us so it's ok. MS are doing the same thing but they are evil. Do you even believe this shit yourself?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Do you even believe this shit yourself?

            Not really, but it's quite lucrative!

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: It's Google's job

            > It's Google's job to spy on us so it's ok. MS are doing the same thing but they are evil.

            Microsoft being evil is independent of whether they spy or advertise.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's not that we hate Microsoft, it's Microsoft hates its Windows and Office users!

          "Microsoft however is not supposed to be an advertiser, it has no obvious business model to slurp or watch my online behaviours"

          You are mistaken:

          https://advertise.bingads.microsoft.com/en-us

  3. Korev Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Data leaks

    I wonder how long it'll be until someone send/saves something confidential through the Google suite instead of the on-prem MS Office. I suspect a low number of days...

    Seems appropriate for Airbus -->

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Data leaks

      Apart from e-mail, and this is already a risk, I suspect this is probably something that can be monitored relatively well. At least you'd hope so given the implications and penalties: not just finanical but also time in the chokey.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "At least you'd hope so given the implications and penalties"

        Maybe, but it could be too late...

        1. Richard 12 Silver badge

          Re: "At least you'd hope so given the implications and penalties"

          Email already makes it incredibly easy to accidentally send confidential info off premises and directly to the wrong people.

          I've had confidential info sent to me by customers and suppliers by accident more than once. Luckily nothing particularly sensitive or subject to GDPR, yet...

          Outlook (among others) makes it quite difficult to realise the mistake, by hiding the actual email address chosen by autocomplete.

          It's far more difficult to do that with something like G Suite, you have to explicitly copypaste the secrets, rather than just use the wrong "To" address.

          1. d3vy Silver badge

            Re: "At least you'd hope so given the implications and penalties"

            "Email already makes it incredibly easy to accidentally send confidential info off premises and directly to the wrong people"

            On a recent MoD contract we had our mail server set up to bounce any external emails back unless we put a specific string at the start of the subject.

            Think along the lines of [EXTERNAL EMAIL AUTHORISED]

            Without that our emails wouldn't make it out of the company.

  4. Rob Moir

    Regardless of which platform you prefer, these kind of half measures will end up bringing the worst of both worlds. It _will_ make collaboration more difficult and information that shouldn't be in g-cloud will almost certainly leak into it.

    And several someones on the side that's intending to move to g cloud will throw tantrums about the change being forced on them and will claim (rightly or wrongly) to have several MS office-specific processes they rely on, a vital macro or template or suchlike.

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      rely on, a vital macro or template or suchlike.

      Or some dept is running a vital business function from some morbidly obese excel sheet....

  5. Teiwaz Silver badge

    Sorry, Microsoft haters: Airbus isn't entirely dumping Office

    Hardly an hallelujah moment since they are switch to Google...

    Perhaps also apologise to Google haters...Why should they be left out?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Hardly an hallelujah moment since they are switch to Google..."

      As many have pointed out of other threads, GS is in general a vastly inferior solution compared to O365 and - as Airbus has clearly stated - they are only deploying GS to shake things up a bit.

      Airbus will still be needing MS Office for circa half their users whatever. Hence they will likely drop GS after a few years once the impact has been achieved and once it's many limitations become apparent - it will after all be an obvious cost saving for the next CFO! It will be another Munich - something that sounded a good idea at the time but was crap in practice and eventually Microsoft's superior product suite capabilities and integration will win out.

      1. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Says an AC. Troll or astroturfer ? Make of it what you will.

        "It will be another Munich - something that sounded a good idea at the time and worked well in practice but eventually Microsoft's superior marketing suite abilities and bribes will win out."

        FTFY

        1. Richard Plinston Silver badge

          > Says an AC. Troll or astroturfer ?

          Most likely it was RICHTO/TheVogon yet again.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "but eventually Microsoft's superior marketing suite abilities and bribes will win out."

          Versus Google - the most evil of companies?!

      2. James12345

        "GS is in general a vastly inferior solution compared to O365" in your opinion.

        Lots of other people feel the exact opposite.

        I've tried both and think GS is far superior to O365 as a collaboration suite and raises productivity because of that.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          re: GS is far superior to O365 as a collaboration suite

          And as Office apps? Which is best in that respect?

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "I've tried both and think GS is far superior to O365 as a collaboration suite and raises productivity because of that."

          I have both now. They are roughly equivalent for shared editing type collaboration but the O365 unified comms and meeting collaboration is away ahead. Gsuite is as a general office suite and an enterprise product not in the same league as O365. Its limited and awful in many aspects.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          >>Lots of other people feel the exact opposite.

          >>I've tried both and think GS is far superior to O365 as a collaboration suite

          It's an office software suite. Collaboration is a small part of what it does. And these days it really isn't any better at that - in fact O365 is ahead on collaboration in several ways. But anyway, the point is that as an office suite there simply is no contest - O365 is miles ahead.

      3. Teiwaz Silver badge

        hallelujah

        As many have pointed out of other threads,

        Excellent points up to 'superior' then disbelief set in, dance with fairies from then...

        The 'hardly a halelujah' was for switching from MS to Google - not exactly a leap into enlightenment - Googles office solution seems too minimal and MS office has always included too, offering way too many attack surfaces and encouraging users to over-depend on it.

    2. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Perhaps this is just a ploy to get MS to lower the price per seat?

  6. TrumpSlurp the Troll Silver badge
    WTF?

    Dual systems

    As several have already commented, having systems with access to both "secure" and insecure infrastructure is going to cause leakage into the cloud from day 1.

    Unless, of course, they are running a secure operating system which will allow you to move documents up a classification (Google to Windows) but not the other way. Even with copy and paste.

    This is looking like a two part process. After about a year it will be obvious that everything is in the cloud even though it shouldn't be. Cue a "that was then and this is now" moment with a push to ditch Office.

    Concerning that they say that this is part of a strategy to change user behaviour. What can users not do under Google that they can do in Office? First obvious thing is massive complex spreadsheets. Perhaps they hope to stop new ones being developed. I can't see them prising Excel from the cold dead hands of those with mission critical spreadsheets; at least, not without an enormous development team to reimplement them. Non-trivial. Just look at the UK Government IT failures trying to replace old, complex systems which are continually evolving.

    1. Steve 53

      Re: New???

      Typically classified and unclassified are separated by air gapped networks. Potentially with 2 stations on the same desk.

      If that wasn't the case now, and say you wrote to either the classified or unclassified CIFS / Sharepoint then you'd have the same sort of mixups now...

      Spreadsheets are rarely *that* complex, and if they are, probably only a fraction of the people need office licenses to keep using them. FWIW the javascript scripting under google is pretty powerful and generally more usable than macros under office.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: New???

        >>Typically classified and unclassified are separated by air gapped networks. Potentially with 2 stations on the same desk.

        Good luck looking at Google Suite documents on a proper air gapped network. This is a major failing of Google Suite - it doesn't have the DRM and encryption management features of Microsoft Office. There is no secure format to send documents around in. The best you can do is forward an ACL controlled URL pointing at the internet. Which obviously doesn't work on a secure network.

      2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Re: New???

        Good thing to purge them, really.

        If they were written by someone halfway competent, they wouldn't be in a language built for quick what-if hacks by keyboard warriors.

        If they're that business-critical, leaving them as undocumented piles of excelment that can't even be maintained by their users (their authors having long fallen to the Peter Principle) is a recipe for disaster.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: If they were written by someone halfway competent

          the language would be irrelevant as they'd be clear to read and maintain.

          A bad workman and all that.....

        2. PNGuinn
          Go

          Re: New??? @ Adrain 4

          +1 for excelment!

      3. se99paj

        Re: New???

        Air gap would be required for Secret - but not for Official

      4. Richard Plinston Silver badge

        Re: New???

        > Spreadsheets are rarely *that* complex, and if they are, ..

        If they are then it is the _wrong_ tool for the job.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Dual systems

      "What can users not do under Google that they can do in Office? "

      Integrate with local business software / data sources ? Run Addins? Create documents that look the same to external recipients? Pivot tables? Power BI? Enterprise Telephony ? Advanced Threat management? Script based user account attribute changes? Privileged Identity Management? etc. etc. etc. etc.

  7. frank ly Silver badge

    G Suite in a box?

    Could Google provide G suite servers 'in a box' and Airbus have it's own on premises localised cloud storage? For a large company with many 'seats', this might work if they are sure that G Suite provides compelling advantages over the Microsoft offerings.

    Goggle would not be selling G Suite software, just allowing the relocation of an image of it to suit a major customer with no deep level access by the customer.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: G Suite in a box?

      Almost certainly but the price would spike and it wouldn't solve all the problems: some of the data also has to stay in a particular country.

      Sill, Airbus already has these kind of problems to deal with with factories in America and China that it has to secure against government agencies.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: G Suite in a box?

        Sill, Airbus already has these kind of problems to deal with with factories in America and China that it has to secure against government agencies.

        Against state-grade actors, Airbus (and any other large corporate) don't stand a chance. In the unlikely scenario that the government agencies can't hack systems with their limitless resource and extensive inventory of vulnerabilities and malware, they'll subvert employees or even put their own people inside, as well as the more old school non-IT forms of industrial espionage.

        1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

          Re: G Suite in a box?

          Against state-grade actors, Airbus (and any other large corporate) don't stand a chance.

          True, but the point being that Airbus already has to contend with this in its network design.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: G Suite in a box?

      "Could Google provide G suite servers 'in a box'"

      Maybe if it runs on Azure Stack? Google don't have a hybrid cloud solution. Put it in Google and you are probably stuck there.

  8. Strahd Ivarius
    Black Helicopters

    Commercial data is not confidential?

    So they worry only about military/national security?

    They are aware that any data stored on G-Cloud will be accessed by G-Men and provided to Boeing?

    1. SkippyBing Silver badge

      Re: Commercial data is not confidential?

      I thought that as well, which makes me suspect that the person pushing this decision has very little to do with security. Anyone know what Dido Harding is up to these days?

    2. lglethal Silver badge
      Go

      Re: Commercial data is not confidential?

      Commercial Data loss only leads to business and profit losses. Military/National Security data losses lead to CTO's and the like ending up in prison. That tends to focus their minds just a little bit...

  9. Amos1

    Uh huh...

    "Cloud is highly secure because it uses all the latest sophisticated capabilities which evolve as the cyber-threat evolves"

    a) There is no cloud. It's just someone else's computer.

    b) Gadgets don't secure data, people do.

    c) All of the above.

    1. TRT Silver badge

      Re: Uh huh...

      Airbus are well used to dealing with cloud of various types and at various levels.

      1. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Re: Uh huh...

        @TRT deserves more credit for that one than he seems to be getting.

        I know it's early on a monday, but get a coffee and read it again.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "Airbus are well used to dealing with cloud of various types and at various levels."

        Just like those that crashed the A330 from Brazil to France? They should have learned to *fear* clouds, especially the big ones...

        1. Richard 12 Silver badge

          Re: "Airbus are well used to dealing with cloud of various types and at various levels."

          That aircraft was crashed by the pilot.

          If the dog had bitten the guy's hands off, they would all still be alive.

          1. PNGuinn
            IT Angle

            Re: "Airbus are well used to dealing with cloud of various types and at various levels."

            That's just the point, Richard. It'll be the jockey, Excel or something else that'll pull the plug and cause the leak.

    2. PNGuinn
      Facepalm

      Re: Uh huh...

      I have this picture of a cloud with lots and lots of bolts nailed on and a herd large of gee gees galloping off into the distant heavens ....

  10. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Facepalm

    "Cloud is highly secure.."

    But not secure enough for national-security-sensitive data.

    So it's not secure.

    Brain, meet wall.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Did you really just put 'bae' in an article headline?

    Not surprised Microsoft won't talk to you. (You could always talk to Tay.)

    1. choleric

      Re: Did you really just put 'bae' in an article headline?

      It might not be de rigueur, but it is punny. BAE Systems (a successor to British Aerospace, aka BAe) has had its own association with Airbus. The reference in the headline implies that this software migration might be similarly messy.

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Did you really just put 'BAE Systems' in an article headline?

        Puzzled me too.

        I thought BAE had sold off its shares in Airbus.

  12. x 7

    "Historic email will "not be generally mass-migrated""

    usually means "we have something to hide"

    1. SkippyBing Silver badge

      And causes total meltdown as everyone uses their inbox as a filing system/audit trail.

      1. JuJuBalt

        So where are they supposed to store it ?....on printouts?....on dropbox?....god forbid....copied to their hotmail/google accounts?

    2. Rocketist
      Boffin

      "Not be generally mass-migrated"

      ...probably means that the average user of those 130.000 has stored emails of their last 15 years, at a rate of around 50 mails a day, without ever deleting anything, and Enders thinks there might be a little storage space saved there.

      What Airbus appears to be saying is they'll give users a chance to forget all of this junk, and possibly extract and save those mails that actually still have any significance. Say the one with the cookie recipe, the one that has Fred's address in it that the user never learned to copy into their own contacts, and the one with that specific detail about project XY the user wanted to remember, or use as a template. Then again, don't quote me on this.

  13. Simone

    I would consider a bet that this is a risk management exercise. I assume that their current MS systems are all on-premise, otherwise that secret data is already 'in the cloud'. How long before they would be forced to ditch the on-premise MS stuff and move to the cloud based offerings?

    Bringing in Google now means they get a head start on any mitigation activities they would be forced to undertake later. This exercise would highlight issues with where their secret data is stored and how to access it, giving them time for a properly developed solution.

    Despite many wishes and protestations, Excel is not a proper database, especially in the hands of most office staff. This on it's own probably justifies having a shake up of the organisation.

    I don't have a crystal ball, so what software will we be using in two years time? Anyone?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "otherwise that secret data is already 'in the cloud'.

      Al least with Microsoft's cloud you can control the data location and encrypt it with keys that only you have access to.

      "How long before they would be forced to ditch the on-premise MS stuff and move to the cloud based offerings?""

      As Office 2019 is already announced and will likely be supported for circa 10 years, not anytime soon unless they want to.

      1. tiggity Silver badge

        re AC

        I encrypt sensitive cloud data - except I don't use the cloud vendors approach but encrypt it on premises before it is uploaded.

        That approach works for any cloud provider & removes concerns about any backdoor the cloud vendor may have re their encryption methods .

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "but encrypt it on premises before it is uploaded."

          Which, of course, precludes any kind of on-line collaboration which Airbus is pursuing...

          Big companies have usually far different needs than small one, especially those made by one person only.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "except I don't use the cloud vendors approach but encrypt it on premises before it is uploaded."

          That only works as a vault or for homogenous database encryption. If you want dynamic encryption then you need to use a cloud provider solution. And the Microsoft one with Thales HSMs is the only one I have seen that offers a decent level of assurance, regional lock down - and full real time key access logging.

      2. oldcoder

        "Al least with Microsoft's cloud you can control the data location and encrypt it with keys that only you have access to."

        You hope. MS can take anything they want.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    the European dimension

    Airbus. European company with European employees at European sites. So falls under GDPR.

    So guess their payroll and HR isn't going onto Google cloud either

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      Re: the European dimension

      Anyone doing payroll in Excel is already in for a whole world of pain.

  15. imanidiot Silver badge

    Version control?

    Version control and preventing data duplication is going to be a nightmare in this scenario. I REALLY hope Airbus knows what it's doing and has a good PDM system in place to keep track of stuff over both systems simultaneously, because this sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Version control?

      (based on previous working experience for Airbus)

      For CAD Data, they have very good PDM systems. Although they change it pretty much every program (causing its own problems).

      For Documents, etc. unless things have changed significantly since I was there - PDM systems? Not on your life!

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I agree with all comments below

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Naked animals are sexy.

      1. WolfFan Silver badge

        This particular naked animal says: keep your hands to yourself, shaved-ape-boy. Or they'll be removed. At the elbow.

        https://www.deviantart.com/art/Angry-wolf-153-256202656

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    These types of articles always attract the same astroturfers, football fan style bickering, and armchair CTOs.

  18. EnviableOne Bronze badge

    Ok so Gsuite > O365

    when

    Microsoft Cloud has Data Protection equivalance (Google don't)

    Sheets < Excel Online (not even on prem)

    Docs < Word Online

    Slides < Powerpoint Online

    Hangouts < Skype For Business/Teams

    Calendar/mail < Exchange/Outlook.com

    Keep < OneNote

    Jamboard\sites < sharepoint online

    O365 allows on prem where you need it

    O365 doesnt require mass format changes

    O365 can handle cloud-onprem hibridisation nativley (Azure AD)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Well, if only you had told Airbus earlier.

  19. Domquark
    Joke

    Well well!

    Airbus using the cloud?

    "Hmm, this should do" says the operative working for [insert the name of a belligerent country here] whilst reaching for a copy of Hacking for Dummies.......

    By comparison HP (EU) are bringing everything back in-house, moving away from the cloud. They obviously know something Airbus doesn't.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Well well!

      By comparison HP (EU) are bringing everything back in-house, moving away from the cloud. They obviously know something Airbus doesn't.

      Yes, HP is a multinational IT company.

  20. Walter Bishop Silver badge
    Devil

    The evolving cyber security threat

    "Cloud is highly secure because it uses all the latest sophisticated capabilities which evolve as the cyber-threat evolves."

    Clench buttock(s), clutch arse(s) and pray ..

  21. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
    Pint

    Heineken

    "Getting staff in different countries and parts of the organisation woking together was the main rationale for choosing Google over alternatives including Microsoft Office 365, Hennekens told us on 15 March."

    Monsieur Hennekens should have had a Heineken before embarking on this - he would then have realised that non-cloud office solutions reaches the parts of the company that cloud solutions do not reach

  22. J J Carter Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Mahoosive security breach in 3, 2, 1...

    Total ‘mare. Last time we looked at G Suite users could change their own group memberships to join hangouts etc as the fancied.

  23. JuJuBalt

    I wonder what Google "gets" out of it.

  24. MJI Silver badge
    WTF?

    BAE?

    No mention of BAE Systems in this article so very puzzled by the mention in the article title.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019