News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by GeekyBear on Monday August 01, 2022 @12:32PM (#32308566)
>Even at Google's scale, they cannot afford to provide high-touch tech support

Yet somehow companies of similar scale like Amazon, Apple and Netflix manage to provide robust customer service.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by kweingar on Monday August 01, 2022 @01:47PM (#32309595)
Keep in mind that all three of these companies provide support primarily to customers who have paid them. If you are on the phone with Apple about being locked out of an account, you have likely spent at least several hundred dollars buying their devices.
Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by GeekyBear on Monday August 01, 2022 @03:10PM (#32310749)
Keep in mind that Google makes a fortune selling customer data in the form of advertising.

If they want to continue to harvest their customer's data they can provide those customers with support.

Also, those Google devices aren't free. You buy a Google device, get no support, and the devices are updated for way fewer years to boot.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by robertlagrant on Tuesday August 02, 2022 @07:40AM (#32317398)
> Also, those Google devices aren't free

You keep mixing things up. The topic is the viability of high touch GMail support, not support for Google's home-grown devices.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by shadowgovt on Monday August 01, 2022 @02:59PM (#32310619)
Apple has a full order of magnitude fewer iPhone users than Gmail accounts. I'm pretty sure, unless I have misunderstood, that acquiring an iCloud email account requires ownership of a physical Apple device... If you're suggesting we should back-stop this problem of marginalized users losing access to Gmail by subsidizing the homeless or elderly to own iPhones, I don't think it will work.

Amazon is similarly an order of magnitude fewer users than Gmail accounts (and tends to address this issue by pushing the hard-to-address auth problems onto the seller... There are known exploits for just pushing exorbitant costs onto the seller via buyer fraud). Amazon has a couple hundred million customers... Gmail is in the billions.

I am, perhaps, just simply old enough to remember when not everyone could have a Gmail account. Low touch customer service that works 99 plus percent of the time was necessary to open the floodgates for free. I have never seen a practical explanation of how to scale providing the service otherwise. There's room for improvement, but (a) every simplification of authentication must be balanced against how it can be abused to steal accounts, and (b) I cannot conceive of a solution that would rival high touch customer service, and that scales to the billions. If one exists, I look forward to being extremely pleasantly surprised (having myself been on the receiving end of losing my phone while away from home for an important event: yes, it really sucks, Google's trust model is they trust you zero without some corroboration if all you show up with is the password). But I've watched them hammer at the problem long enough to suspect it's uncrackable at the billions-scale.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by GeekyBear on Monday August 01, 2022 @03:12PM (#32310764)
Google makes more than enough money to be able to provide customer support.

They simply choose not to.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by shadowgovt on Monday August 01, 2022 @04:00PM (#32311323)
That's a pretty [citation needed] assertion. Again, we're talking a risk surface stretched across 1.5 billion users. There are few architectures of that scale in existence today; we're talking Chinese government, every-bank-on-Earth numbers.

I'd be interested to see a workable solution but, to-date, I never have.

Re:Librarian's Letter to Google Security by woweoe on Monday August 01, 2022 @01:41PM (#32309490)
650-253-0000