You are here

Google: "Security is part of Google's DNA" -- ("Do Not Ask")

"Security is part of Google's DNA" is Google's slogan to soothe security concerns about its services much like "competition is one click away" is Google's antitrust slogan to soothe antitrust concerns about its dominance. 

While Google claims security is metaphorically in the "DNA" or "genetic code" of their many cloud applications, "DNA" is also Google code for "Do Not Ask."

"Do Not Ask" is Google's unspoken MO -- method of operation.  

  • Google's innovation MO teaches its people -- "Do Not Ask" for permission -- just do it. Google strongly believes in the "innovation without permission" approach. Google prides itself as an innovative culture where innovation is encouraged by eliminating expectations of getting approval or permission of higher-ups to get something done. It even pays its people to spend 20% of their efforts on personal innovation, which generally does not require permission, but is assumed.  
  • Google's search business MO is also "Do Not Ask" users, if it is ok for Google to track them most wherever they surf on the web, or if it is ok for Google to compile on them the most intimate and complete digital profile ever before assembled. The default Google business practice is often "Do Not Ask" because a user would most likely say "no" if presented with an explicit fairly represented choice about whether to protect their privacy and security.      
  • Google's content business MO is "Do Not Ask" property owners for permission to use their property: copyrights and trademarks. Google openly presumes whatever property they use is "fair use" and if a property owner catches them and objects, they will then either pull it down or choose to meet the property owner in court. Paying for the content is not an option because Google believes digital content should be free. Google's "finders keepers, losers weepers" "Do Not Ask" value system has led to a wide swath of intellectual property violation lawsuits from most all types of IP owners:  
    • TV programming: Viacom has sued Google-YouTube for $1b for mass copyright infringement. 
    • Movies: The MPAA has sued Google for abetting movie piracy.
    • Books: Authors and publishers have sued Google for copyright infringement; see pending book settlement.
    • Wire services: AP seeks payment for Google News AP content; Agence Press also separately sued Google for copyright infringement. 
  • Google's security/privacy MO is yet again "Do Not Ask" so that Google can assume that whatever previously non-public information -- that they can be first to popularize with the public -- should in fact be made public. 
    • Google Maps exposed different nations' sensitive security-related locations without permission. Wikpedia
    • "Google Earth lays bare UK Nuclear defences" without permission. Computer Weekly
    • Google Streetview has photographed residences in several countries without permission prompting public outcry in most every place. US, UKJapan, Germany, Australia, etc.   

Security, on the other hand is all about accountability, and accountability requires asking for permission, getting authentication, and asking security questions.           

Google knows it can't get a "no," if it Does Not Ask. And if Google Does Not Ask, Google is much more profitable than competitors that do ask users, property owners and people permission to use and make money off their private information and proprietary property.

  • Google CEO Eric Schmidt confirmed Google's corporate bias against security in answering a question at a public forum 11-19-09 per Washington Internet Daily:
    • "But improving security can 'make things slower,' and Google must balance security against performance."

***This is Part III of a series: "Why Security is Google's Achilles Heel"

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths