ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Project openness and architecture

  • Several commenters initially struggled to find the code; links show the stack is hosted on a public GitLab under a German government-related namespace.
  • openDesk is described as “basically a huge Helm file” orchestrating many existing open‑source components: Nextcloud, Collabora Online (LibreOffice Online fork), Element, Jitsi, OpenProject, XWiki, CryptPad, etc.
  • There is a community edition and an Enterprise Edition; docs explicitly recommend EE for production.
  • Some are uneasy that EE uses components whose source is only provided to customers on request (e.g., Nextcloud Enterprise with an AGPL‑licensed “Guard” app, a non-public Collabora controller), arguing this blurs the “fully open” story even if it complies with GPL terms.

Features, spreadsheets, and UX

  • Confusion over whether there is an Excel replacement; documentation states full support for documents, spreadsheets, and presentations, implemented via Collabora Online/Calc.
  • One commenter notes tool overlap is unintuitive (e.g., CryptPad not actually used for word processing in openDesk).
  • Comparisons with LibreOffice/OnlyOffice: some praise them as viable collaborative alternatives; others criticize LibreOffice UX as clunky and productivity-harming.
  • People express interest in self-hostable alternatives but skepticism about paying for them or convincing organizations to migrate.

Deployment and maturity

  • openDesk is portrayed as reasonably straightforward to deploy with sufficient RAM, via Helm/Kubernetes.
  • Lack of screenshots, sparse roadmap page, and missing repo links on the marketing site reduce confidence for some, though others point out real government adopters and active development.

Sanctions, sovereignty, and Microsoft dependence

  • Large portion of the thread focuses on US sanctions against the ICC and the CLOUD Act, arguing any US-based cloud (Microsoft 365, Google, etc.) is structurally incompatible with strong data sovereignty.
  • EU “blocking statute” and espionage laws are mentioned as potentially making EU-based staff liable if they assist in US sanctions enforcement.
  • Many question why the ICC ever used Microsoft 365 given long-standing US hostility to the court; some see this move as overdue and essential to its mission.
  • Others highlight:
    • Deep inertia, low per‑user cost, and integrated stack (identity, email, office, storage, BI) as reasons governments standardized on Microsoft.
    • Growing European “digital sovereignty” initiatives (like openDesk) as a strategic response, though questions remain about cost, support, and whether such moves will stick.