Google Desktop

[Ed62]

Does anyone here use it? If so, does it have the ability to search a second hard drive? Does it slow the computer down? Any other pros or cons? The price is right (free).

Ed

[linear]

yes, yes, not appreciably, and if you have a lot of messages in Outlook it finds Outlook mail about 10-15x faster than an Outlook search will.

[crokett]

Used to. I installed it but then took it off. Never used it much - the dir command always works for me.

[Ed62]

Thanks for the replies. I'll give it a try.

Ed

[Alex Franke]

yes, yes, not appreciably, and if you have a lot of messages in Outlook it finds Outlook mail about 10-15x faster than an Outlook search will.

This is exactly what I would have said.

[mashtun]

Google Desktop

Just as a message about the CON of Google Desktop.

There are some serious securtiy inplications in using it. People have without knowing it, made there data avaible to anyone on the web. I think this is fixed, but I am not sure.

Also if your whole family uses one PC, each with their own accounts, then whoever is logged on, can use the google desktop search to bypass virtually any security, to read other people's emails, documents, etc.

You can read more about this, just by googling, on "google Desktop search security holes".

I will say that my corparate IT department, dislikes these features enough that installing this on a company PC, is a fireable offense.

John

[linear]

I guess I should point out here that I'm not speaking in my capacity as manager of Data Security at a financial institution when I say the following:

Late in 2004, there was an issue with a beta version of this product. It was fixed rapidly once details came to light. Modern versions have a large number of settings that allow you to control what information you share with Google. Notably, you can set your search scope very specifically (so if you have insanely secret material on your drive, just exclude it from being indexed), and you can choose whether to index encrypted files. You can tie it to your Google account and search across machine instances that way (at the cost of giving up some data to Google)--opting out would be the more conservative posture. You can opt out of integrating Google's web results with your desktop results--in either case the desktop results aren't sent to Google. And modern versions update themselves to ensure you aren't running a vulnerable edition (although you can opt out of updates).

This software is a tool. Used with due caution, it is extremely powerful and can save you much time. Used with no caution, it can expose you to some risk. Just like a tool in the conventional sense.

Would I even suggest someone should be fired for installing it? No (I'm running it on my work peecee, configured conservatively). John, if that's your IT department's position, they are either really good or really bad at risk management, I can't quite tell which. There's also an enterprise version which allows settings to be centrally administrated, keeping users from shooting themselves in the foot in a corporate environment.

[Ed62]

Thanks for pointing out possible security weaknesses. I kind of expected to see a post concerning that.

Ed

[BTC3K]

Too Insecure

No...no...noooooo...not...don't
Never Any Toolbars To Assist...do It The Long Hard Safe Way And Be Secure As You Can!!!!!

[radhak]

I have tried GD before, and discarded it in favor or Yahoo Desktop Search : YDS offered more flexibility (type of files to index, folders not to index, etc) and more traditional (less confusing) user interface.

Nowadays it's called X1. The best feature for me is that if you search (say) PDFs, it allows you to view contents of each PDF without having to click-open-close the file. And it's footprint is much smaller (ie, it hogs much less resources on the computer, particularly if you disable Lotus Notes email indexing).

[linear]

No...no...noooooo...not...don't
Never Any Toolbars To Assist...do It The Long Hard Safe Way And Be Secure As You Can!!!!!

3x5 cards will make us all more secure, this is true.

But security is always a tradeoff. Google desktop search makes you incrementally more productive and incrementally less secure, just like using email, or using a word processor, or using any other software.

There will be those for whom the incremental decrease in security outweighs the increase in productivity, and vice versa.

[crokett]

Linear, my company has banned it also, to the point that the software update checker that is installed as part of the standard software image checks for it. A guy I used to work with now works in IT security. I asked him about it a while back. He said it was in part because my company deals with some classified government data and also in part because users, are well, dumb. Most would have no idea how to configure it properly, so it is easier just to not allow it.

[greencat]

I used and liked it until our IT group took it away. For the last week I have been using Windows Desktop search and it seems to work as good as google. I work for a large company and the Windows Desktop search must be safe or they wouldn't let me use it.

[radhak]

... I work for a large company and the Windows Desktop search must be safe or they wouldn't let me use it.

Stop Right There! !



Big Company + MS product = CYA, hence it thrives.

Used to be called the IBM Factor decades ago, when the safest thing a CTO could do was contract IBM for any job - even if they failed, s/he could say "I brought in IBM, what more do you ask?".

Now, since MS bundles everything in, the idea (wish?) is that it must be safe. Even a small level of research would show how foolhardy that assumption is.

My org's allowed browser if IE, and Firefox is supposed to be 'not approved' ! So all those who follow the rules keep cribbing about pop-ups and viruses etc, while some of us keep quiet about the fact that we don't encounter all that because we only use FF .

[linear]

A guy I used to work with now works in IT security. I asked him about it a while back. He said it was in part because my company deals with some classified government data and also in part because users, are well, dumb. Most would have no idea how to configure it properly, so it is easier just to not allow it.

This kind of gets to my earlier comment about risk management.

Statements I consider to be true:
* Running a desktop search engine (including Google's) increases your risk of data leakage.
* Running a desktop search engine could increase productivity for some people.

The risk/reward balance will fall in different places for different people and organizations. Understanding what's at stake is very important, as is knowing the proper value of time and information.

There are places and situations where the balance is such that it makes sense to fire someone for having a productivity tool. I wouldn't suggest that is very common though. In a corporate setting, guys like me get paid to worry about that crap.

I think the spirit of the original question is in the context of running GD on your own peecee at home. Some people will not find it useful, others will. Some people will be able to tolerate the incremental risk, others won't. For a typical home user, it is probably about neutral. For heavy Outlook users, it's a must-have. People with loads of super secret documents should avoid it and develop a good filing system instead.