Google to try more security on Gmail
After prompting by a group of privacy advocates, Google said Tuesday that it plans to test a more secure version of its Gmail service to see if it is viable.
Google plans to change its back-end servers so that some users will automatically use an encrypted HTTPS (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure) connection when they use Gmail. Right now, everyone uses HTTPS to log in to Gmail, but after that Web pages are sent without encryption.
This is a bad thing, privacy experts say, because it means that hackers with access to a network -- say at a café with Wi-Fi -- could take over a Google account using a technique known as session hijacking. They could also read e-mail, which often contains sensitive information.
"If you wanted to steal someone's identity, the inbox is where it's at," said Christopher Soghoian, one of the experts who called on Google to make the changes.
Soghoian, a student fellow with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, was one of 38 security and privacy experts who Tuesday called on Google to adopt HTTPS.
Not only does HTTPS encrypt e-mail, making it harder to read, it also provides a way of authenticating the servers, so users can be more sure that they're really talking to Google and not some phishing site.
Gmail users can already read their messages via HTTPS, but to do this they need to click a "browser connection" box at the bottom of the settings page. Under the test, HTTPS would be turned on by default. HTTPS can be used to securely connect part or all of a Web page.
Google Docs and Calendar users can connect via HTTPS as well, but there's no setting to make this permanent. Users must simply type in https:// every time they connect to these services.
Last year, Google said it didn't use HTTPS by default because it would make the Web site too slow.
Soghoian has floated the idea at privacy events over the past few weeks that Google should be pressured to adopt SSL (Secure Sockets Layer), and Google's response to him was fast.
"We'll move small samples of different types of Gmail users to HTTPS to see what their experience is, and whether it affects the performance of their e-mail," Google Software Engineer Alma Whitten said in a blog posting Tuesday. "Does it load fast enough? Is it responsive enough? Are there particular regions, or networks, or computer setups that do particularly poorly on HTTPS?"
Sign up for ITworld's Daily newsletter
Follow ITworld on Twitter @IT_world
On Twitter now
jfruh
Apple syncing patent can't come soon enough
pasmith
New Twitter features borrow from 3rd party clients
Esther Schindler
Open Source Changes the Software Acquisition Process
mikelgan
How to set up continuous podcast play on the new iTunes
David Strom
Five important Windows 7 mobility features
sjvn
Guard your Wi-Fi for your own sake
Sandra Henry-Stocker
Grepping on Whole Words
Sidekick: The Good News & the Bad News
Either way you look at it Microsoft Data Center management did not follow standards or best practices in this failure. In which case it makes me wonder more about the outsourcing of corporate data much less personal data.
- mburton325
Join the conversation here
Quick, practical advice for IT pros. Made fresh daily.
Want to cash in on your IT savvy? Send your tip to tips@itworld.com. If we post it, we'll send you a $25 Amazon e-gift card.













The gmail https situation
Several comments. First, https does not encrypt emails. It establishes an link between the browser and server where the data on that link is encrypted, and then decrypted when it comes out the other side. So the email itself stays decrypted.Secondly, one of the consequences of this change (as I have been using it for a while now) is that any HTML based emails send will generate a warning about the fact that while the link to gmail is https, not all the links within a specific email are https, and thus you have a mix of "secure" and "unsecure".
Lastly, understand that while this may protect one in a wifi cafe from session hacking, it does not protect the user from various other security threats (not that you implied otherwise). People can still impersonate a site in an email, etc.