Google's New Browser

So, Google have released a new browser called Chrome...

What does that mean from an Information Security perspective?

Not very much and a lot, depending if you are looking at the short term or long term.

So, lets get into the short term - there is a new browser. It will have bugs and vulnerabilities. These will be exploited.

Most of the browser is based on webkit which is sorta what kde uses and sorta what safari uses and sorta what a number of cell phones use. It is becoming browser number 4 after IE, mozilla/firefox and opera. This means that hackers (online criminals) will start to notice the browser (if they haven't already). Assuming that the open source promise (many eyes make fewer bugs) stands true and that Google will be quick with patches then this is merely part of the daily application vulnerability race. And if Google is quick with paches then this browser should not be any more unsafe than the others.

There are a few extra security features in this browser - that is always a good thing. For more information read here. Of course the feature that is most interesting - "each-tab-running-separately" has been compromised.

So short term - move along, nothing to see here. Lets move on to the long term...

What is most important in my mind for the long term is the "why" of this browser - why would Google want to jump into a market where they can't be the biggest or the best or even a very effective niche player? Especially since they have a good relationship with Firefox and their product is almost entirely webkit? And their browser is essentially all open source so all the good bits will be analysed and added to Firefox anyhow or improved upon and added to Firefox.

The answer is simple - Google want their browser to fail.

Huh?

Well, that may a bit unfair but they really don't care either way.

Google is the search engine leader. They are also slowly becoming the Internet. This blog is hosted by Google, its feed is hosted by Google. If I need to host video, pictures, sound etc then I would probably choose Google - they are really good at hosting and why bother looking elsewhere when I already have a Google account?

So, almost all of my public information is hosted by Google. What about my private information?

Well... no.

That is all stored safely on my laptop for four reasons -

1. I don't trust Google.
2. I don't trust the Internet.
3. The tools for creating private documents are so much better than the online ones.
4. I can get to my documents when I am offline.
5. The Internet is too slow.

But a lot of my computer day is spent in Microsoft Office. That is a lot of advertising opportunity lost. And if Google can access my personal files then they will have a better idea of what adverts to send my way. Which in turn will make their advertisers happier and Google stock go up.

And all it would take is sorting out the above 5 points.

I was going to go into each one but this post is already getting quite long. Just note that the three features that are most important in Chrome are:

• Security and stability
• Offline application mode
• Fast running and standards based application engine

In other words - helping making it easier to use Google's online applications. Most of the factors are going to be taken care of with Chrome and its kids.

What will happen is that Firefox will catch up with Chrome but Google won't care what you use to access their online applications - just as long as you access them. And that is their game plan.

What this leaves is the final question - all things being equal - is your information more at risk on Google's servers or on you laptop at home?

That is a good question but one we should be looking at.

Paris Hilton could make you lose your virtual underwear.

Beware of Paris Hilton...

She may be behind bars but she can still hurt you..

Or rather, it is reported here that a site offering some private stuff of hers has been hacked. And, ironically, all those looking to get a taste of her private stuff have had their private details downloaded.

Think before you send your details over to "parisexposed.com" and its ilk, do you want the world to know, with pretty good certainty what you get up to? If privacy is like underwear on the Internet -you could get caught without it.

Rushing to Catch up with the 70s (Part 3) - The Big Picture

This posting is in response to Andy the IT guy's blog posting which in turn is about a Dark Reading article.

In summary the article blames all the problems we have today on the way the Internet was designed.

In my first (serious) post on my blog I discuss how secure we were back in the 70s (well..not me..I was still a kid) because computers were designed to not trust their users. With the advent of DOS computers were all trusting and it has taken time to get back to how it was in the 70's. We are still on our way.

Add the two together and you get - strict, secure PCs and open networks. Sounds good to me.

Maybe one day PCs will be so tight that they can sit out on the Internet and we will not have to worry about them. Maybe we will be able to know who is connecting to our network and be happy in the knowledge that their PC can't possibly be in dire need of patches. Maybe viruses will become a thing of the past.

Social engineering will always be with us until we can build better people. Maybe our kids are already learning. We grew up in a world where you don't talk to strangers, they are growing up in one where you don't blog with them or instant message them. The wolf is still there, he is just online. And maybe this will make our kids more infosec aware.

I don't see us ever getting rid of Firewalls but it would be nice if the work of keeping PCs safe was done on the boxes and not on the network. Like it was in the 70s.

Initial Thoughts

Right, here we go.

Post number 1.

According to the blog article on Wikipedia:

"Gartner Group forecasts that blogging will peak in 2007, levelling off when the number of writers who maintain a personal website reaches 100 million. Gartner analysts expect that the novelty value of the medium will wear off as most people who are interested in the phenomenon have checked it out, and new bloggers will offset the number of writers who abandon their creation out of boredom. The firm estimates that there are more than 200 million former bloggers who have ceased posting to their online diaries, creating an exponential rise in the amount of dotsam and netsam (i.e. unwanted objects) on the Web."

So, is my Blog just for jumping on the bandwagon? Or is it more than that?

Well, at least by submitting this one little comment onto the huge Internet for Google to preserve for ever I become Time magazine's person of the year. Which is not bad going for a few minutes of playing around while on the Company's payroll.

It means I join such greats as JFK (former president), Nelson Mandela (former president) and Rudi Giuliani (for President!). Of course, also in the same company is Stalin and Hitler.

This is not the first time I have left my footprints on the virtual sands of the Internet, if I google (lowercase "g") myself I find little traces of Me all over. Some are surprisingly insightful, (incite-fool?) and some are quite embrazzering.

Blogging is new to me - this is my first geniuine post. And I am amazed at how easy it is. Well done blogger. I look foward to doing more posts as soon as possible. Starting with the next one - what this blog is all about anyhow.