Google may have great lawyers and a lot of money, but what if they tell them "hey, you know that tax-free money you're sending to the Bermuda [2]? Yeah, FTC will be knocking on your door tomorrow to ask you about that".
So I guess what I want to know is if Google will actually stand their ground and protect their users till the end by doing the right thing, or they'll "compromise" if the potential cost to their business is too great. Maybe in the past it was easy to believe Google would actually do the right thing, but it's becoming increasingly harder to believe that.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-websi...
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests
If you think any U.S.-based company is able to do better, I'd love to hear how.
- Chromebook mobile site: http://us.chromebook.withgoogle.com
- Developer Bus: http://developerbus.withgoogle.com
- Full Value of Mobile: http://www.fvm.withgoogle.com
- Google Analytics Academy: https://analyticsacademy.withgoogle.com
- Google Expert: http://expertbrasil.withgoogle.com
- Google Wallet Instant Request Form: http://getinstantbuy.withgoogle.com
- Mapping: https://mapping.withgoogle.com
- Online Marketing 101: https://onlinemkt101.withgoogle.com/preview
- Royal Baby Congrats Card: https://royalbabycard.withgoogle.com
- Tour Builder: https://tourbuilder.withgoogle.com
- Web Accessibility: https://webaccessibility.withgoogle.com
- YouTube Creator Academy: https://creatoracademy.withgoogle.com
- Your Tour (Tour de France): http://yourtour.withgoogle.com
Non-English:
- http://vpered.withgoogle.com
- http://docchinogame.withgoogle.com/pc/
- http://minchizu.withgoogle.com
Does anyone know what it takes to mitigate DDoS, at this kind of scale?
Cynicism is warranted when it comes to Google. The fact that they gave NSA direct access to their systems; the fact that their Street View cars collected personal information through wi-fi networks, etc. means that "Don't be evil" is just a facade.
The simplest way to mitigate a DDOS is to just have way more resources than your attacker. If you're getting hit with 10Gbps, and your site can handle 100Gbps, you're not going to go down. Google obviously has plenty of capacity.
On top of that there are filtering technologies that can block obviously fake traffic or well-known signatures like the LOIC.
The most sophisticated attacks occur at the application level. A Google service would not be able to help configure your install of Wordpress to resist this. But they could probably serve a static cache of your site. Interactive features like login or search would not work though.
Cloudflare does all of these things and more.
The way I read this, Google would not charge for this service. They would select "worthwhile" sites to protect out of the goodness of their heart.
The cynical take is that it is a PR project to help repair their "defenders of the Internet" brand. They built it up with SOPA, but it's been damaged by PRISM.
>A protection racket is an operation where criminals provide protection to persons and properties, settle disputes and enforce contracts in markets where the police and judicial system cannot be relied upon.
Of course, Google isn't threatening anyone with DDoS, (even assuming that they somehow make money of you).
Otherwise though, it's somewhat of an interesting analogy. This is a form of protection (of online property). And you can't really rely on the police to protect you from DDoS. I suppose it would be more reasonable to just compare it to a security firm though.
What? These websites are unlikely to be hosting their ads ("election sites" is one of the examples ffs). It's free while they're beta testing it with humanitarian/similar websites, it may be a driver for people to pay for the Page Speed service in the future when they roll it out to more people although they say they'd like to keep it free for non-profits.
All of which you'd know if you'd read the site rather than making ludicrous comparisons to the mafia.
Microsoft really should have patented the `Embrace, Extend, Extinguish' business method back in the day ;-)
But the interesting tidbit coming out of this project's going to be the internal packet/traffic scrubbing system they've developed. Will it be commercialized or will it spawn a new startup. So many positive outcomes however it ends up.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/google-now-using-recaptcha-...
How peculiar. The tech is DDoS mitigation, but the PR focus is on "free expression online", Syrian gas attacks, and evil Iran.
Wonderfully executed. The internet crowd is cheering the "free speech", the government approves of the Middle East angle.
Meanwhile, PRISM keeps working and very few care about it.
As wonderful as Project Shield sounds, there is a fundamental risk of it being undemocratic.
Content that will certainly not be protected: - Content that violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
- Illegal pornography, snuff videos ...
- sedition,incitement
- confidential NSA stuff (you know, because it helps terrorist )
