[HN Gopher] Google tries internet air-gap for some staff PCs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Google tries internet air-gap for some staff PCs
        
       Author : beardyw
       Score  : 127 points
       Date   : 2023-07-20 06:35 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theregister.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theregister.com)
        
       | nickdothutton wrote:
       | Anyone mentioning is air gap is often scorned these days, because
       | in practice it is rarely used, used for long, or survives "this
       | one workflow we really, really need and is commercially
       | important". However there are occasions and situations where it
       | can be workable. Air gap is a weapon. Know when to use it.
        
       | fsflover wrote:
       | Or they could use Qubes OS, which in some cases is more secure:
       | https://www.qubes-os.org/faq/#how-does-qubes-os-compare-to-u...
        
       | junkjunkaccount wrote:
       | some staff = most engineers who work with the monorepo
        
       | Skunkleton wrote:
       | Why is this called an air gap? It's not. They are just
       | firewalling off workstations most (not all) of the public
       | internet.
        
       | catsarebetter wrote:
       | Seems a bit extreme but I suppose they have to try to at least
       | some mitigation strategies.
       | 
       | 7th largest DDos attack in history last august, Gmail cyberattack
       | a few hours ago. That's just what we know too.
        
       | AndrewKemendo wrote:
       | I thought BeyondCorp zero trust was supposed to completely and
       | totally solve all of this such that air-gaps and network
       | compartments are a thing of the past.
       | 
       | Air-gapping is creating a system-low zero access enclave. No
       | different architecturally than running a separate access gateway.
       | 
       | Or is this a case of "yeah nobody ever actually believed that?"
       | 
       | Having run classified networks there's absolutely a need for
       | compartmentalized system-high networks
        
         | konschubert wrote:
         | My interpretation of beyond corp is about creating a very small
         | inner parameter where only the prod machines have access - and
         | those "airgapped" super-admin laptops that the article talks
         | about.
         | 
         | 99% of dev and admin work then takes place outside that
         | perimeter, outside the VPN, by authenticating machines and
         | encrypting traffic with TLS. Since you will always expect
         | compromised machines and bad actors in this area outside the
         | inner perimeter, a four-eyes principle for any critical
         | actions, such as code changes and configuration changes, is
         | necessary.
        
         | TheNewsIsHere wrote:
         | I always thought BeyondCorp was intended to replace the VPN
         | infrastructure with (effectively) a TLS reverse proxy gated by
         | rules, SSO, device posture inspection, etc.
         | 
         | That's how I always interpreted the marketing and technical
         | documentation anyway.
         | 
         | I would be surprised if they're not already running PAWs for
         | things like administrative access to production GCP primitives
         | and similar, even if they're also running PAM, hardware
         | authentication, and so on. I know Microsoft does for admin
         | privileges to the Azure fabric.
        
           | AndrewKemendo wrote:
           | I'm simply responding to Google's own language:
           | 
           | "We are removing the requirement for a privileged intranet
           | and moving our corporate applications to the Internet."
           | 
           | That's from the original ZT paper and is making a HUGE claim
           | that all access in computing is more secure if you use ZT
           | over physically (not just logically) separated networks.
        
             | anon84873628 wrote:
             | I think "corporate applications" are different from
             | "production infrastructure" and "developer tooling"
        
       | jsnell wrote:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36780752
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36797471
        
       | debarshri wrote:
       | I remember working in 2010 with Tata consultancy services as BofA
       | as customer, they would make the service provider go through
       | these hoops. The employees of TCS would connect over teamviewer
       | into a VDI that would have access to the actual server where they
       | would code. It used to be a hub model i.e. the VDI was somewhere
       | is east or west cost and employees were in india, experience was
       | crappy as the customer was getting billed per hour, no one cared.
        
         | zvmaz wrote:
         | What's a BofA? What's a VDI? I feel like Hacker News is filled
         | with acronyms that take some effort to parse.
        
           | gavanm wrote:
           | BofA is like Bank of America. VDI is virtual desktop
           | infrastructure (like Citrix)
        
           | SonOfLilit wrote:
           | Bank of America. Virtual Desktop... Interface or somesuch.
           | 
           | I like HN full of acronyms, it teaches me what's important
           | enough in an industry to shorten.
        
           | aloe_falsa wrote:
           | BofA is Bank of America.
           | 
           | VDI is Virtual Desktop Infrastructure.
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | That sounds terrible. I worked as a telco where we experimented
         | with having a development environment on VMware, twelve VMs in
         | total per developer. You'd remote desktop to on of the VMs and
         | use Visual Studio from there, it was absolutely terrible. I
         | can't imagine throwing TeamViewer across oceans into the mix,
         | I'd go absolutely nuts from the lag alone.
        
           | blown_gasket wrote:
           | This kind of development is a terrible experience if the
           | overall infrastructure isn't setup to support development
           | also.
           | 
           | To have it be successful you need to not have persistent VMs
           | that individuals are connecting to individually but rather
           | ephemeral VMs that get created/deleted when a user needs one.
           | 
           | Those ephemeral VMs then need to be able to connect to the
           | rest of the infrastructure that supports development - your
           | artifact repositories, version control system, docker nodes,
           | k8s clusters, etc.
           | 
           | Your artifact repository then needs to mirror public
           | repositories where your source packages can be found, be it
           | pypi, github, golang, helm, docker hub, etc. You will now
           | have to setup your IDE or shell package manager to use this
           | artifact repository as a proxy.
           | 
           | The developer tooling is usually an entire team and the
           | infrastructure for the VMs is also.
           | 
           | Not an easy or cheap thing to setup. But it can be done so
           | that the developer experience is good and so that you don't
           | have developers running random versions of software.
        
             | debarshri wrote:
             | This is how quite some enterprises run their infrastructure
        
       | 1B05H1N wrote:
       | """ The company will disable internet access on the select
       | desktops, with the exception of internal web-based tools and
       | Google -owned websites like Google Drive and Gmail. Some workers
       | who need the internet to do their job will get exceptions, the
       | company stated in materials.
       | 
       | In addition, some employees will have no root access, meaning
       | they won't be able to run administrative commands or do things
       | like install software. """
       | 
       | -https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/18/google-restricting-internet-...
       | 
       | This is pretty standard across the industry for some
       | workstations/build machines.
        
         | mattgreenrocks wrote:
         | Where I work restricts admin access. We can request it
         | temporarily and all actions are logged.
         | 
         | Works just fine on macOS!
        
       | t8sr wrote:
       | If you take away the word "workstation", this is what many dev
       | environments already look like: a mini version of the production,
       | which includes restrictive network rules.
       | 
       | You use the internet from your laptop, not the workstation.
       | 
       | Also, the article is using "air gap" wrong - it refers to an
       | actual physical disconnect, which is not what this is. Only some
       | firewall rules are apparently getting changed.
       | 
       | Disclaimer: I have no privileged information, only common sense
       | from working in security and at FAANGs.
        
         | marcosdumay wrote:
         | Yes, but if the headline was "Google plans to firewall build
         | servers outside of the internet" we wouldn't have read the
         | article or done any discussion about it... except maybe for
         | some random "wait, they don't to that?!?"
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | I hope they also remove USB drives and don't let them connect
       | unauthorized bluetooth and keep their laptops in the office. Most
       | users would just start working on their home pc and then you have
       | their work account compromised on their home laptop. With USBs,
       | you'd be surprised how many air-gap breaching worms there are.
        
         | _Wintermute wrote:
         | I worked at a pharma company who disabled internet access for
         | most people. Many downloaded things on their phone's 4G and
         | transferred them to their computer with a USB cable, it was
         | pretty pointless.
         | 
         | That said, I'm sure Google's IT are far more competent than
         | that horror-show.
        
         | smueller1234 wrote:
         | The entire story isn't about laptops. It's about the
         | workstations that may be used to work on code locally (or also
         | build it locally). These machines already aren't allowed
         | outside of premises.
        
         | lozenge wrote:
         | I work at a bank and I know our security is higher than most,
         | but I'd be shocked if usb drives are allowed in the Google
         | offices.
        
           | badrabbit wrote:
           | They have yubikeys, so unless they only use nfc it is likely.
           | Also, chromebooks and usb-c.
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | At Arm IME they weren't banned, just training on not picking
           | up from car park etc. - I'd expect the same of Google, at BAE
           | Systems I physically couldn't access the USB (or any) ports
           | on my desktop computer, but that doesn't really work when
           | you're given a Macbook and able to work from home and coffee
           | shop etc.
        
             | lozenge wrote:
             | You can block USB mass storage devices through OS policies,
             | it doesn't prevent everything though (people have demoed
             | frying computers using capacitors, or using USB keyboards
             | to open the terminal and execute code)
        
             | rejectfinite wrote:
             | >but that doesn't really work when you're given a Macbook
             | and able to work from home and coffee shop etc.
             | 
             | MDM like jamf and/or EDR/Antivirus like SentinelOne and
             | Carbon Black can disable USB ports/anything in software. If
             | your account is not admin/root you cannot remove them also.
        
       | danpalmer wrote:
       | This article is missing a key detail: that the expected workflow
       | is that the workstations are basically just build machines.
       | 
       | My workstation is just an SSH server that I do builds on,
       | everything else is on my laptop. I can't remember the last time I
       | used the internet on my workstation. I install packages but those
       | come via a mirror, I scp files back and forth but that's internal
       | only.
       | 
       | Lots of people aren't on this workflow yet, but I don't think
       | anyone is suggesting airgapping the main interface people are
       | using.
        
         | mgraczyk wrote:
         | Many people at Google still use desktop Linux workstations.
         | Those would be airgapped too under this plan and force these
         | people to change to another workflow. There are at least
         | hundreds of people who have been there 10+ years still using
         | desktops for all development. For example on the team I was
         | previously on, 4/8 people used a desktop workstation as their
         | main device.
         | 
         | I used a cloud VM as my main machine, and still used internet
         | all the time. I used github to sync my configuration (using a
         | proxy would be out of date and no way to push), amongst other
         | things.
        
           | LargeTomato wrote:
           | ~5 years ago I had desktop Linux and a chrome book. All
           | compilation happened via cloud build and the preferred IDE
           | was the cloud-based web app. I didn't really use my desktop
           | for anything, not even ssh.
           | 
           | I switched to a Chromebook in the pandemic and honestly it
           | was fine. My workflow barely changed. I wasn't a vim fanatic
           | at the time so I didn't really care.
        
             | bombolo wrote:
             | > the preferred IDE was the cloud-based web app
             | 
             | possibly, not everybody is ok with using a not so good
             | editor, no debugger integration and keeping their ssh and
             | pgp keys somewhere else than a local machine.
        
               | LargeTomato wrote:
               | >keeping their ssh and pgp keys somewhere else than a
               | local machine
               | 
               | This is Google. Who is using ssh keys for anything?
        
               | bombolo wrote:
               | new gpg supports them for signing... do you not sign
               | commits?
        
               | mgraczyk wrote:
               | The in-browser editor at Google is actually very good and
               | has built in debugging support. Some people still don't
               | use it though, and this change seems to ignore that.
        
             | mgraczyk wrote:
             | Many people don't do that. They sit in front of a desktop
             | with a monitor plugged into it and use the desktop for
             | everything, including stack overflow etc
        
               | LargeTomato wrote:
               | They don't need the desktop for stack overflow. They're
               | launching a browser. They can launch the browser in any
               | computer without breaking their workflow.
        
               | mgraczyk wrote:
               | That doesn't make sense to me. You can't copy-paste into
               | and out of your editor across machines.
               | 
               | You see an error message on your desktop, you want to
               | search for it. What do you do?
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Unless I've misunderstood the documentation, I think Jetbrain's
         | new Fleet editor is planned to support this sort of workflow.
        
         | IX-103 wrote:
         | The other key detail missing was that this was just an
         | experiment that was going to be active only on a small set of
         | machines for a limited time. They wanted to get data on how
         | much it impacts users workflows, what the opt out rate is, etc.
         | 
         | There's not even a current plan to continue limiting access
         | after the trial period ends, much less a plan for expanding it
         | to more machines.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | hamandcheese wrote:
         | How do you ssh in to your workstation? Via some internet-
         | connected bastion host?
        
         | kyrra wrote:
         | I have a number of co-workers that do the same, but I can't
         | live without my full Linux desktop environment. This is
         | especially true if you use intelliJ or other desktop apps. Yes
         | you can remote desktop, but it's just not the same.
        
           | Jenk wrote:
           | full ide on local machine that remotes to a devcontainer.
        
           | tyrust wrote:
           | You can run this workflow with a Linux laptop.
        
             | jppittma wrote:
             | Why do we have to tell other people how to work? Why can we
             | not just empower people to work however they'll be most
             | productive?
        
             | Arainach wrote:
             | For various workflows, the only viable solution is to
             | remote desktop into my workstation and run the browser
             | there. SSH isn't enough. And don't get me started on the
             | disaster of trying to do things locally (Cmd+C) and
             | remotely (Ctrl+C) simultaneously or the awful experience of
             | mixing screen DPI when connecting a linux laptop to
             | external monitors...
        
               | swexbe wrote:
               | VSc over ssh? Jetbrains Gateway? I think both work
               | decently.
        
               | Cagrosso wrote:
               | VSC Remote I can agree with. Gateway feels like such an
               | after thought. So many bugs and it's very resource
               | intense in my experience. I really like Jetbrains
               | products but their remote offerings are lacking. Makes me
               | wonder if that's why they are working on Fleet to fill
               | that gap.
        
               | eptcyka wrote:
               | If all you need is a browser, you can use SSH as a SOCKS
               | proxy for your browser.
        
               | Arainach wrote:
               | We can't use proxy servers on corp-provisioned machines.
        
             | Arainach wrote:
             | For many people the experience of working from a laptop is
             | poor. Mixing screen resolutions and density. Audio devices
             | constantly changing as a plug into or out of my docking
             | station. Yet another thing to fight for space on the desks
             | they're always trying to densify. Etc. Etc.
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | All the coverage on this memo has missed this point. I guess
         | they can't imagine a company giving its employees _two_
         | computers!
         | 
         | You can BYO ChromeOS devices too which make great thin
         | terminals to a remote workstation or cloud VM. I have a whole
         | bunch from dogfooding preproduction Chromebooks.
        
           | grrdotcloud wrote:
           | I've been 100% ChromeOS for ten years.
           | 
           | All my dev work, personal, and internet while I work. KVM to
           | swap. External screens.
           | 
           | Strict separation of work and life. No key logging like the
           | work system. No fillers.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | I also ran that setup when I worked at Google. I liked it a
             | lot. ChromeOS was a great desktop OS; even when I was in
             | the office, I just ssh'd to my Linux workstation from a
             | Chromebox. Thus, "local" and "remote" had the same
             | experience.
        
             | dheera wrote:
             | Good for you, my personal life often involves connecting to
             | real hardware in the field and ChromeOS doesn't work for
             | that.
        
           | varelse wrote:
           | Sure, they give you two computers. But you better not ask for
           | a GPU!
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | Do you get one of those m2 coral to click in there?
        
           | philjohn wrote:
           | The other option is provisioning dev servers as VMs on big
           | hosts, which some other companies do. That's where the build
           | and development happens, using an IDE locally on the issued
           | laptop which uses remoting.
        
             | Guvante wrote:
             | I suspect it is mostly who supports build machines desktop
             | support or network support.
        
           | danpalmer wrote:
           | I feel like much of the _internal_ coverage missed the point.
           | There were a lot of people arguing in bad faith, ignoring the
           | fact that the whole idea was clearly tied to the rollout of
           | the particular workflow where no internet would be needed on
           | the machines in question. Most devs still aren 't working
           | like that yet, and so pushed back hard.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | wffurr wrote:
             | It seems so weird to me to want to use Linux on the
             | desktop. This is not The Year.
             | 
             | I decided at the very start of my career, before Google, to
             | use a laptop at the primary interface and only use
             | workstation / dev environment / etc. remotely. That way I
             | have the same working experience at my desk, at a cafe, on
             | my desk at home. The only thing that changes is the number
             | and size of monitors. It's worked out really well, and
             | during the COVID era it only got better due to investments
             | in the remote workflows.
             | 
             | I wouldn't even notice if my VM lost internet access and
             | root.
        
               | 8n4vidtmkvmk wrote:
               | I've been using Linux since I started nearly 5 years ago,
               | plus the previous 8 at my last company. I don't have any
               | major issues.
               | 
               | SSH disconnects are still annoying. And mosh/tmux/screen
               | don't do it for me.
        
               | wffurr wrote:
               | Mosh and tmux have worked great for me for the last 12
               | years. Different strokes I guess.
        
               | throwbadubadu wrote:
               | What's wrong with the desktop at Linux, why "classical
               | desktop" at all? I love my tiled wm setup so much since
               | >10 years, and absolutely hate my corp windows desktop so
               | much for everything it does to me. Gf similar regrets her
               | chosing a private Mac Airbook everytime she uses it and
               | swears to never buy one again every time she uses it (but
               | uses it to seldom to consider just installing an Ubuntu,
               | otherwise would do that)... so we are maybe strange
               | people but
               | 
               | > It seems so weird to me to want to use Linux on the
               | desktop. This is not The Year.
               | 
               | It seems so weird to me everybody considering their
               | Windows or Mac as desktop ;)
        
               | omgmajk wrote:
               | > It seems so weird to me to want to use Linux on the
               | desktop. This is not The Year.
               | 
               | Why? I've used it for many years and still like it very
               | much. I use Windows too, but I do most of my work in
               | Linux. Why would this be weird?
        
               | 40yearoldman wrote:
               | I would still want Linux on my laptop.
               | 
               | It has been "the year" for Linux on the desktop for the
               | last 10 years, even more so if you use Emacs as your WM.
        
             | lokar wrote:
             | A bunch of people with admin access used a setup like this
             | for a while shortly after the china hack years ago. It's
             | not that bad.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | My first job out of college I ended up with the
               | absolutely slowest box in the office, which definitely
               | pushed me toward optimizing our app (it wasn't even good
               | on fast machines, but it was tragic on slow), but compile
               | times were murder.
               | 
               | We had a Sparcstation somewhere in the office being used
               | as a mail server and nothing else. I don't recall how but
               | I managed to SMB or NFS mount a directory so that I could
               | edit code on my piddly little desktop but compile it on
               | the Sparc. First time Java really worked as advertised
               | for me.
               | 
               | Saved me loads of time and let me iterate on ideas that I
               | don't think I or my boss would have had the patience for
               | otherwise.
               | 
               | I'm not entirely keen on language servers, but those
               | would be another area where distributed computing could
               | come in handy. I think what might be missing though is a
               | multitenant version. Everyone on my team has a duplicate
               | model of our dependencies loaded into Webstorm and it's a
               | pig.
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | By "bunch" you mean the entire SRE org. I felt like it
               | was a good setup, but I also felt that the long-term
               | strategy of reducing the access necessary to operate the
               | infrastructure was a good one. But why not both, as the
               | child in the meme asks?
        
               | lokar wrote:
               | Far from all, mostly traffic and a few others
        
             | UncleMeat wrote:
             | Yeah this is the unfortunate outcome of the past two years.
             | Memegen is now primed to take anything in the maximally
             | critical way.
        
               | shemnon42 wrote:
               | Memegen has been toxic for way more than two years. Even
               | before they gave the holiday bonus devices to school
               | children.
        
               | LargeTomato wrote:
               | The days of good faith, logical, respectful arguments is
               | gone. Googlers (the ones on Memegen) have become a bunch
               | of whining and bad faith actors.
        
               | kajecounterhack wrote:
               | Memegen is unbearably whiny now, but doesn't feel like
               | it's because Google hires whiners. It feels more like
               | valid employee feedback, accurately capturing valid
               | worker sentiment toward shitty, randomizing leadership.
        
               | gipp wrote:
               | It can be both.
        
               | LargeTomato wrote:
               | Memegen is toxic and, today, a net negative to the
               | company.
        
             | Nullabillity wrote:
             | Sounds like fighting against that sort of miserable
             | workflow is part of the point.
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | Is the internal discourse aware of "cleanroom" or has that
             | institutional memory disappeared?
        
         | strogonoff wrote:
         | I wonder if more package management tools should adopt the
         | zero-install approach of Yarn Berry. You don't even need a
         | mirror: everything is right there in the repository. Want to
         | update a dependency? That's a commit, thank you very much.
        
           | codetrotter wrote:
           | I imagine parent commenter meant OS-level packages.
           | 
           | I.e. things like installing and updating clang, cmake, etc
        
             | danpalmer wrote:
             | Yep. It's one of the few things I'm doing on my workstation
             | that ostensibly needs the internet, except because of the
             | mirror it also doesn't.
        
         | Jenk wrote:
         | we do the same. Codespaces, gitpod, or coder.dev all provide
         | for this kind of workflow and honestly it just makes so much
         | sense. Corporate desktop for comms and internet, ssh to a
         | devcontainer (or vm if that is desired) for development
         | activity.
        
           | danpalmer wrote:
           | Exactly. It's really just about isolating builds and code
           | that runs from everything else. If you can afford the
           | infrastructure, and can afford to make the infrastructure
           | work well for everyone (arguably much harder), then it's a
           | good idea with few downsides.
        
         | jppittma wrote:
         | A lot of people I know don't use them like that. They have a
         | chromebook and RDP onto their cloudtop and never close it. One
         | thing I like(d) about google is that they let you bring
         | whatever workflow you're most productive with, rather than
         | prescribing an "expected" workflow on you.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | Are you sure? Why would a build machine need access to GMail?
         | 
         | >The report says Google's new pilot program "will disable
         | Internet access on the select desktops, with the exception of
         | internal web-based tools and Google-owned websites like Google
         | Drive and Gmail.
         | 
         | https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/07/to-defeat-hackers-go...
        
           | beebmam wrote:
           | Why would a "desktop" be a build machine in this era?
        
             | Pannoniae wrote:
             | Laptops almost always have cooling which definitely won't
             | sustain 100% CPU or GPU usage for 2 hours for a buildjob.
             | On my desktop with fairly standard, non-fancy air cooling,
             | I could run it on 100% for hours, and the only thing which
             | would happen is the fans spinning loudly. On my work
             | laptop, the poor thing (with an i9!) begins to heat up like
             | crazy after 5-10 minutes of virtual machine usage.
        
             | mgraczyk wrote:
             | GPU
        
             | ValleZ wrote:
             | Why not?
        
             | rejectfinite wrote:
             | I have noticed here on HN that a lot of people don't have
             | desktops and think they are as good as laptops in terms of
             | performance. lol
        
           | praptak wrote:
           | My build machine sometimes needs to send logs to attach to
           | bugs or have other humans inspect them. This obviously
           | doesn't _have_ to be Gmail but it comes pretty handy.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | Bug trackers and build logs are all internal systems,
             | though.
        
               | sassifrass wrote:
               | So is Gmail - it's Google after all.
        
           | amf12 wrote:
           | > Are you sure? Why would a build machine need access to
           | GMail?
           | 
           | Because some people like to use remote desktop with it. And
           | because some people's "build machine" is a VM, or a physical
           | desktop in the office for some others.
        
             | croes wrote:
             | You can access your mails on your computer, so it's not
             | necessary to access GMail on the remote desktop computer.
             | 
             | Sounds more like Google isn't talking about workstations
             | but the peoples normal computer they work one, just with
             | limited internet access.
        
       | clhodapp wrote:
       | When your entire business is built around public internet
       | services and public internet enabled devices in the hands of end
       | users, this approach feels like losing the plot. Compare with
       | something like BeyondCorp, which actually advanced the state of
       | practice in corporate security just a few short years ago, in a
       | super internet-positive way.
       | 
       | What'll be their next old-school corporate move? Time cards? A
       | ban on phones with cameras? A buggy middlebox that forges TLS
       | certs?
        
         | gunapologist99 wrote:
         | I nearly lol'ed at the mention of time cards, but even though
         | it seems kinda like facebook banning facebook, actually all of
         | these could have some merit.
        
           | clhodapp wrote:
           | Or like Apple banning smartphones among the people that do
           | iPhone development
        
       | karthie_a wrote:
       | this is historic practise in any secure work environment , like
       | govt departments ,healthcare,financial institutions,pharma and
       | energy. based on level of protection required they lock the
       | access accordingly. allowing USB in work station is not allowed
       | generally by any employer. In most secure environments they
       | disconnect your work station from outside world and is generally
       | connected only to internal network. If you require internet
       | access you can apply for it and get approved,which will be
       | monitored by the network admins.
        
       | retrocryptid wrote:
       | Maybe deploying a train load of commodore 64s would work.
        
       | valleyjo wrote:
       | When I worked on azure compute we had dedicated laptops that were
       | basically bricks. All they did was connect to production. No
       | internet no admin rights limited set of software. This is a
       | pretty reasonable security move.
       | 
       | This approach from google is basically the opposite. No internet
       | on your workstation but your laptop works like normal.
        
         | konschubert wrote:
         | The flip side of this is that you can ease the paranoia on the
         | coding machines. You should probably be ready for 5% of them
         | being compromised at any given time.
        
           | jppittma wrote:
           | The workstations are the coding machines. You're not allowed
           | to have google code on your laptop.
        
       | formerly_proven wrote:
       | I thought Google's security is so impeccable that getting a
       | reproducible RCE on engineering workstations doesn't matter?
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35581532
        
         | cavisne wrote:
         | This is exactly the sort of attack this change is helpful for,
         | as pip would not work at all on these machines. Probably the
         | only way to stop these "social engineering" (as google
         | characterized it) attacks.
        
         | hgsgm wrote:
         | The scariest part of that thread is the many people saying that
         | closing your eyes and yelling "zero-trust" means that you don't
         | need to protect your devices from compromise.
        
       | anotheryou wrote:
       | If only it included meetings and messaging. This way is silly
        
       | nirui wrote:
       | > Those who choose to participate will have their general
       | internet access removed along with root privileges on their
       | individual boxes if they had that
       | 
       | Is it just a software thing? For example IP blocking via
       | iptables? 0-days in OS kernels are not something super surprising
       | in these days, not really sure a software lock would really help
       | that much.
       | 
       | Maybe they should just give their employees two computers, one
       | air-gapped for accessing internal systems and must be kept in the
       | company facility issued the computer, and another one fully
       | online for accessing Stack Overflow and must not store any
       | company information.
        
         | politelemon wrote:
         | Maybe the StackOverflow bit could be replaced with a local LLM
         | assistant?
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | Or a local copy of SO, there are torrents.
        
             | umeshunni wrote:
             | It's conceivable that the Google index has a copy of SO
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | It's almost certainly a network-based firewall, not a host-
         | based one. And if you use multiple firewalls from multiple
         | vendors with different OSes running on the firewalls,
         | theoretically, an attacker could have zero days on all of them,
         | but it's statistically much less likely than an attacker having
         | a zero day on only one popular consumer/server OS.
        
         | amf12 wrote:
         | /> Maybe they should just give their employees two computers,
         | one air-gapped for accessing internal systems
         | 
         | And why do you think that may not already be the case? Even
         | other big tech companies already give out two computers.
        
           | smueller1234 wrote:
           | It is the case at Google and none of them are actually air
           | gapped in the real meaning of "air gapped".
        
         | lloeki wrote:
         | Looks like so:
         | 
         | > Google's tools and office software accessed via the web will
         | still be accessible to those cut off from the internet
         | generally. Workers in the program who require internet access
         | for their jobs will be able to get exceptions.
         | 
         | The headline twists the definition of "air gap".
        
           | jeffbee wrote:
           | Eh from their perspective google services are in prod, not on
           | the internet.
        
             | NegativeK wrote:
             | Unless your production is some really sensitive also air-
             | gapped setup, perspective doesn't change what's going on.
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | I think we've already established that the term air-gap
               | has been misused in the article.
        
       | galkk wrote:
       | If bard will provide at least somewhat useful suggestions to
       | quirks of particular language (I'm looking at you, c++) and/or
       | there will be whitelisted or mirrored sites like
       | cppreference/godbolt, then I suspect I won't need actual big
       | internet for work at all.
       | 
       | Most of the reference documentation is actually internal
       | project/other google sources and internal docs/guides/design
       | docs.
        
         | weinzierl wrote:
         | I find that idea fascinating but I doubt it will fly.
         | 
         | Todays LLMs are no suitable replacement for documentation, in
         | my experience, because their knowledge is so sparse. You will
         | not notice it immediately because they fill the gaps with
         | plausible nonsense. Also training a model with domain specific
         | knowledge is not a realistic option for most of us as of today.
         | 
         | For having all the reference documentation locally (possibly
         | indexed in a vector database and accessible to the LLM) I'm
         | doubtful as well, since it is so hard to determine scope
         | beforehand. A couple of years ago I tried to program off-grid
         | and prepared a MacBook with Dash (an OSX offline doc reader)
         | and all the reference docs I thought I need. It was a
         | nightmare, and that is from a dude who learned programming
         | before the Internet, based on offline docs solely.
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | I worked in offline environment for a few years. It was not a
           | nightmare. It's less productive, that's for sure, but not by
           | far margin. And it compensates by lack of online
           | distractions.
        
           | wakeupcall wrote:
           | Working offline is perfectly doable. I've grown not to rely
           | on connectivity when I was living in a rural area with
           | spotty/slow 3g connectivity at best.
           | 
           | Not relying on network connectivity in my entire pipeline is
           | still today a big discriminator in the stack I choose.
           | 
           | The biggest downside was, and still is, documentation. I had
           | a script that scavenged the installed packages and downloaded
           | all relevant documentation packages automatically, along with
           | a local indexing service (I'm still using and recommend
           | "recoll").
           | 
           | There is a humongous gap between libc/posix (anything
           | instantly accessible with "man" with stunning quality) and
           | pretty much everything else. Even python, which has a decent
           | "online" (built-in) reference, is not as convenient and
           | easily searchable when looking at the html manual itself.
           | 
           | A local search index doesn't have the inference power of
           | something like google to point you to the right example
           | you're looking for something in cppreference.
           | 
           | And once you pass the top 10 best documented packages you
           | have on system, you realize how downright bad everything else
           | is documented and how much you rely on the search engine to
           | fill the gaps from unofficial sources.
           | 
           | For me at least, documentation was always THE problem.
        
         | mike_hock wrote:
         | cppreference can be downloaded and used locally.
         | 
         | godbolt would be a weird choice to whitelist if you go through
         | the trouble of airgapping in the first place. All it takes is
         | one accidental copy&paste of a sensitive code snippet and it's
         | there for the world to see with no undo.
        
         | LoveMortuus wrote:
         | I work in customer support and while I haven't yet used Bard
         | (because at the time it wasn't available to me), I have used
         | ChatGPT to tell me what the customer is actually asking of me,
         | when I didn't understand their emails. And thus far, it's been
         | quite helpful. I even asked if once to rewrite the greeting
         | part of the email so that it included now empathy (I'm kind of
         | emotionally inhibited, as my doctor put it) and judging based
         | on customer response, they were quite pleased.
        
           | Philip-J-Fry wrote:
           | How are people getting things like this past management? I
           | work in a big company and it is stressed to us that the last
           | thing we ever want to do is paste proprietary code, customer
           | info, internal documents, etc. into a cloud LLM. Especially
           | since there's every chance that the prompts could become part
           | of the future training set.
        
             | withinboredom wrote:
             | They probably don't even know, and why would they care? OP
             | never said they were pasting personal information or
             | proprietary code.
        
               | Philip-J-Fry wrote:
               | A support ticket or live chat with a customer is customer
               | data. With things like GDPR you need to know exactly
               | where customer data is stored and for how long. Once
               | you're pasting this in cloud LLMs that data is out of
               | your control and you're breaching GDPR.
               | 
               | The last thing someone expects is that when they're
               | replying to a support ticket is Google or OpenAI being
               | fed that info and it's being put into a training dataset.
               | 
               | We all value our privacy but it seems accepted to breach
               | other people's privacy for the sake of using an LLM to
               | make your job easier.
        
               | arghnoname wrote:
               | At my job, any information we get from customers is
               | treated as private/personal. It would be a fireable
               | offense to load it up into some third party database or
               | service.
               | 
               | I have not, will not, and am not allowed to copy and
               | paste anything into chatGPT from my company that I
               | wouldn't be comfortable putting on twitter. I agree with
               | this policy.
        
             | zo1 wrote:
             | I don't get this perspective at all. Seems like a new breed
             | of hyper-legal worry about litigation yet to happen. I
             | don't want to live in the world you live in, buddy. Please
             | don't take it as a personal attack.
        
               | Philip-J-Fry wrote:
               | It's not a new breed of hyper-legal worry. It's basic
               | privacy that we all expect. I don't expect a customer
               | support advisor to be pasting my messages into an LLM
               | without my knowledge. And no sane company would allow
               | employees to do it with any sort of customer data or
               | proprietary information.
               | 
               | We have things like GDPR which are all about protecting
               | your data. People are breaking the law and violating the
               | rights of customers for the sake of making their job a
               | little bit easier.
        
               | arghnoname wrote:
               | It's not about litigation. Companies have actual secrets,
               | such as upcoming products, mergers, and acquisitions.
               | Putting a bunch of non-public information into these
               | things (often run by competitors!) may inadvertently leak
               | that information on generative text, and that's assuming
               | there's no such thing as corporate espionage.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | > judging based on customer response, they were quite pleased
           | 
           | I'd like to know if chatgpt agrees.
        
             | gunapologist99 wrote:
             | In summary, it's important to remember that the grandparent
             | comment may have been written by a Large Language Model.
             | Also, I can't help you do that.
        
       | elif wrote:
       | Seems like Google could just build some routing around their
       | existing archive service and give all of their employees a stale
       | copy of the web for 99% of cases. Use LAN for communication, etc.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Can they still run Windows?[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://www.techradar.com/news/upcoming-windows-11-pro-
       | updat...
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | evnix wrote:
       | We all know how this will be used in the next firing round.
        
       | MarkusWandel wrote:
       | If these machines are denied outside internet access, but still
       | connect to an internal network on which other machines have
       | outside internet access, then that's a firewall, not an air gap.
        
         | konschubert wrote:
         | Thank you pointing this out, I was extremely confused.
        
         | FirmwareBurner wrote:
         | Exactly. The author doesn't know what an airgap actually means.
        
           | yodelshady wrote:
           | Multiple times I've seen companies be the originator. Quite
           | simply, it's insurance fraud. They demand an air gap, you say
           | you have one.
           | 
           | You can certainly argue that, at a general level, air gaps
           | don't work for the same reason teen abstinence doesn't work.
           | They don't happen. But in specifics, particularly for infosec
           | professionals, it should be _your job_ to call out
           | dishonesty. _Not_ to not along sagely and say  "air gaps
           | don't always work". If your airgapped machine is breached,
           | there better be a USB lying around, or a _physical_
           | configuration change.
           | 
           | JFC, my Xbox is not airgapped _.
           | 
           | (_actually it currently is. But you get the point.)
        
             | halJordan wrote:
             | You know you're in for a treat when you see a thread
             | wanking itself over some industry term. Usually it's some
             | brittle, partial definition being forced onto an entire
             | industry. Idk if you've worked in a modern air gapped
             | networked (jk) but the vast and overwhelming majority of
             | them do in fact have a physical connection to a network
             | capable of reaching the Internet.
        
           | Firmwarrior wrote:
           | Yeah, this discussion is really weird. An actual air gap
           | would be great for security and a huge pita to work on. This
           | half-assed fake airgap seems like a bunch of security theater
           | that's going to make people's day to day jobs a lot more
           | annoying
        
         | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-22 23:02 UTC)