4 ms·

Groklaw - The Google-Microsoft Fight About FISMA Certification

25 points by ssclafani 16y ago

Luyt 16y ago
Groklaw isn't shutting down because SCO became irrelevant. It seems Gloklaw continues with a broader scope of interest.
taylorbuley 16y ago
I thought Groklaw was to cease publishing?
- fleitz 16y ago
  They will cease publishing as soon as companies PJ likes stop going to court with companies she doesn't. In this case Google is pro-open source because they give away complements to their business model while keeping things that make them money closed source whilst Microsoft gives away complements to their business model while keeping things that make them money closed source which clearly distinguishes Google as good and Microsoft as evil.
  - hsmyers 16y ago
    And you know this how--- Because SCO told you or what? Groklaw will not close; PJ will stop writing articles, but the site will remain. There is even an outside chance that the reins will be turned over to another to keep up the crusade to educate both geeks and lawyers.
sriramk 16y ago
Very hesitant to get involved in this but to quote Frank Shaw's tweet at https://twitter.com/fxshaw/status/58672412950138880 https://twitter.com/fxshaw/status/58672412950138880 - "just pointing out we never said we had the certification. Google did. DOJ said they didn't." There's also this post http://www.geekwire.com/2011/blog-fight-google-calls-microsoft-irresponsible-suggesting-misled-federal-government http://www.geekwire.com/2011/blog-fight-google-calls-microso... which highlights both sides of the story so far.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
btilly 16y ago
It is worth noting that the Department of the Interior and the Department of Indian Affairs have lost a series of major lawsuits due to corruption and mismanagement. For instance Indian tribes sued it over the loss of $10 billion in Indian trust money, its own employees successfully sued it 4 times over violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, individual agents such as Duane Garvais have their own lawsuits against it. In short in virtually any dispute where there are allegations of corruption, lying, unfair practices, and the like, past history inclines me against believing whatever version of facts the Department of the Interior chooses to put forth. The fact that in this case they are on Microsoft's side in a Microsoft vs Google fight does not help their credibility.
dblock 16y ago
IMHO, there's nothing shocking here for anyone who ever sold or built enterprise software for the .gov. The things involved in these deals are very complex. Google needs to hire some amazing enterprise sales people and not push its "we're right, you're wrong" message.
- barista 16y ago
  Google is really novice in this game. They will learn the tricks over time. Microsoft has played the game for many years now.
- txxxxd 16y ago
  Yes, that would be the easier route to take for a large company with pockets as deep as Google's. I think this move is smarter than that though. Google has a knack for picking fights that not only help their own immediate cause (landing this govt. deal) but also aim for the greater good (fighting corruption, ensuring the better technology wins.) Whether it's genuine or just a show is impossible to tell, but if you don't have a vested interest in either side then you can't help but root for Google.
kenjackson 16y ago
I just read the quote that everyone is printing (although haven't seen the full statement). GSA certified the Google Apps Premier environment as FISMA compliant in July of 2010. Google Apps for Government uses the Google Apps Premier infrastructure, but adds additional controls in order to meet requirements requested by specific government agencies. The original FISMA certification remains intact while GSA works with Google to review the additional controls to update the existing July 2010 FISMA certification. It's unclear to me what they're saying with respect to Google Apps for Gov. Are they saying that it is FISMA certified as of today? Or are they saying that its pending recert after the review, but the original Google Apps Premiere is still certified? It sounds like they're saying its not certified w/ new controls, but they don't have to a full certification process on it as its built on a certified product -- they only need to check the deltas. In which case the DOJ and MS are technically correct. Or are they saying that if you make a small change that requires recert, you keep you certification as the review takes place and they can revoke cert if they determine there's a problem. I can't believe that would be the case, because it would require pulling down a deployment, which can be expensive. It would be nice if they simply said, "Google Apps for Gov" is certified. We're doing additional certs on new functionality, but the new functionality can be deployed as the cert is checked. But it's the US gov't, this is probably as clear as they get.

25 points by ssclafani 16y ago

Luyt 16y ago

Groklaw isn't shutting down because SCO became irrelevant. It seems Gloklaw continues with a broader scope of interest.

taylorbuley 16y ago

I thought Groklaw was to cease publishing?

fleitz 16y ago
They will cease publishing as soon as companies PJ likes stop going to court with companies she doesn't. In this case Google is pro-open source because they give away complements to their business model while keeping things that make them money closed source whilst Microsoft gives away complements to their business model while keeping things that make them money closed source which clearly distinguishes Google as good and Microsoft as evil.
- hsmyers 16y ago
  And you know this how--- Because SCO told you or what? Groklaw will not close; PJ will stop writing articles, but the site will remain. There is even an outside chance that the reins will be turned over to another to keep up the crusade to educate both geeks and lawyers.

sriramk 16y ago

Very hesitant to get involved in this but to quote Frank Shaw's tweet at https://twitter.com/fxshaw/status/58672412950138880 https://twitter.com/fxshaw/status/58672412950138880 - "just pointing out we never said we had the certification. Google did. DOJ said they didn't." There's also this post http://www.geekwire.com/2011/blog-fight-google-calls-microsoft-irresponsible-suggesting-misled-federal-government http://www.geekwire.com/2011/blog-fight-google-calls-microso... which highlights both sides of the story so far.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

btilly 16y ago

It is worth noting that the Department of the Interior and the Department of Indian Affairs have lost a series of major lawsuits due to corruption and mismanagement. For instance Indian tribes sued it over the loss of $10 billion in Indian trust money, its own employees successfully sued it 4 times over violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, individual agents such as Duane Garvais have their own lawsuits against it. In short in virtually any dispute where there are allegations of corruption, lying, unfair practices, and the like, past history inclines me against believing whatever version of facts the Department of the Interior chooses to put forth. The fact that in this case they are on Microsoft's side in a Microsoft vs Google fight does not help their credibility.

dblock 16y ago

IMHO, there's nothing shocking here for anyone who ever sold or built enterprise software for the .gov. The things involved in these deals are very complex. Google needs to hire some amazing enterprise sales people and not push its "we're right, you're wrong" message.

barista 16y ago
Google is really novice in this game. They will learn the tricks over time. Microsoft has played the game for many years now.
txxxxd 16y ago
Yes, that would be the easier route to take for a large company with pockets as deep as Google's. I think this move is smarter than that though. Google has a knack for picking fights that not only help their own immediate cause (landing this govt. deal) but also aim for the greater good (fighting corruption, ensuring the better technology wins.) Whether it's genuine or just a show is impossible to tell, but if you don't have a vested interest in either side then you can't help but root for Google.

kenjackson 16y ago

I just read the quote that everyone is printing (although haven't seen the full statement). GSA certified the Google Apps Premier environment as FISMA compliant in July of 2010. Google Apps for Government uses the Google Apps Premier infrastructure, but adds additional controls in order to meet requirements requested by specific government agencies. The original FISMA certification remains intact while GSA works with Google to review the additional controls to update the existing July 2010 FISMA certification. It's unclear to me what they're saying with respect to Google Apps for Gov. Are they saying that it is FISMA certified as of today? Or are they saying that its pending recert after the review, but the original Google Apps Premiere is still certified? It sounds like they're saying its not certified w/ new controls, but they don't have to a full certification process on it as its built on a certified product -- they only need to check the deltas. In which case the DOJ and MS are technically correct. Or are they saying that if you make a small change that requires recert, you keep you certification as the review takes place and they can revoke cert if they determine there's a problem. I can't believe that would be the case, because it would require pulling down a deployment, which can be expensive. It would be nice if they simply said, "Google Apps for Gov" is certified. We're doing additional certs on new functionality, but the new functionality can be deployed as the cert is checked. But it's the US gov't, this is probably as clear as they get.