If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Register)   Cloud providers want you to know that the NSA is the least of your worries   (theregister.co.uk) divider line 24
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

3363 clicks; posted to Business » on 07 Jul 2014 at 6:12 PM (15 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



24 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-07-07 03:25:35 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-07-07 03:27:26 PM  
cdn.instructables.com
 
2014-07-07 06:31:49 PM  

dittybopper: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 754x252]


Ding ding ding.  Basically, if you have critical businesses services in "the cloud", you have zero control over performance or security and are at the provider's mercy.  Your power is limited to the contract written totally in the cloud provider's favor, assuming you even went so far as to go through a contracting process and not just accept the equivalent of a EULA when you signed up your company for EZCloud or whatever buzzworthy named provider is out there to throw your critical data.  And, your damages are most likely limited to the amount of money you spent for the cloud subscription.  Paid $600 for a year's worth of SupraCloud services which went down at the 60% mark of your annual contract and cost you $40,000 in business?  Too bad, here's your $260 pro-rated refund check for the remainder of your contract.  Otherwise, talk to our cadre of lawyers that will cost you $40,001 to resolve, assuming you pass the arbitration process.  Oh, and if you want your data back, you'll have to provide your first and second born children, up front.

"Cloud" is great, until it isn't.
 
2014-07-07 06:45:43 PM  
"The cloud" is like any other tool; beneficial if used correctly, harmful if not.
 
2014-07-07 07:39:18 PM  
So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?
 
2014-07-07 07:41:32 PM  
"CISA is an even more toxic bill than the original CISPA bill. CISA stays in line with the original objective of the CISPA bill to strengthen and legitimize the NSA's surveillance programs. But this time the bill would allow for and encourage sweeping datamining taps on Internet users for the undefined purpose of domestic "cybersecurity". The NSA would be able to share this data with police and other law enforcement agencies for domestic "cybersecurity" purposes - meaning these powers will be used against innocent citizens."


"We need to stop CISPA for good this time. We stalled it in the Senate earlier this year, but now Senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss are planning to introduce the Senate version of the bill any day now. Just like last time, they'll claim that the privacy concerns have been addressed, even though they've refused to make changes suggested by civil liberties groups. Let's make this the last time they try anything like CISPA. Sign and share the petition now."


http://www.cispaisback.org/
 
2014-07-07 09:15:05 PM  

Bob Down: So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?


www.siliconrepublic.com

/*shrugs*
 
2014-07-07 09:18:55 PM  

Bob Down: So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?


The box is actually blue, not black like the picture of the Internet posted above.
 
2014-07-07 09:19:34 PM  
sp.yimg.com
 
2014-07-07 09:20:21 PM  

Bob Down: So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?


Marketing.

Things need a new name/ad campaign every 10-15 years or else they'll go stale. Helps businesses hustle capital from rube investors. That's why we call them apps now instead of programs.
 
2014-07-07 10:16:16 PM  
I'm switching to the fog.
 
2014-07-07 10:23:41 PM  
I'm currently in the smoke.
 
2014-07-07 10:44:35 PM  

Bob Down: So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?


The "cloud" is someone else hosting your Personal and Corprorate data and mining it
The Internet is someone taking your personal or corporate data and mining it
 
2014-07-07 10:47:44 PM  

BalugaJoe: I'm switching to the fog.


Smart move.
If a cloud crashes look how far your datas will fall and be destroyed when they hit the ground. At least with the fog you can just go out and pickup your datas
 
2014-07-08 12:26:41 AM  

Ishkur: Bob Down: So what's the difference between The Internet and The Cloud again?


Marketing.

Things need a new name/ad campaign every 10-15 years or else they'll go stale. Helps businesses hustle capital from rube investors. That's why we call them apps now instead of programs.


Actually, the difference is monetization.  People will pay for the Cloud.  They won't pay for the Internet.

/though how the hell people use 25 GB of storage over a 802.1bgn wireless network is still a mystery to me
//Everybody wants cloud sync, though
///Cue Shut_up_and_take_my_money.jpg
 
2014-07-08 12:32:44 AM  

thrasherrr: though how the hell people use 25 GB of storage over a 802.1bgn wireless network is still a mystery to me


Thousands of pointless pictures saved at full resolution, days' worth of uncompressed mediocre music, and wobbly, grainy video footage shot at 1080p.
 
2014-07-08 12:40:33 AM  

valkore: thrasherrr: though how the hell people use 25 GB of storage over a 802.1bgn wireless network is still a mystery to me

Thousands of pointless pictures saved at full resolution, days' worth of uncompressed mediocre music, and wobbly, grainy video footage shot at 1080p.


...and porn. Lots and lots and lots of porn.

www.secuk.org
 
2014-07-08 06:56:22 AM  

Bumblefark: valkore: thrasherrr: though how the hell people use 25 GB of storage over a 802.1bgn wireless network is still a mystery to me

Thousands of pointless pictures saved at full resolution, days' worth of uncompressed mediocre music, and wobbly, grainy video footage shot at 1080p.

...and porn. Lots and lots and lots of porn.

[www.secuk.org image 300x233]


You must be new to the internets:

37prime.com
 
2014-07-08 07:57:49 AM  

AbuHashish: I'm currently in the smoke.


You will get much better performance if you add mirrors.
 
2014-07-08 08:29:35 AM  
Pfft.  I've gone full nebula.
 
2014-07-08 08:48:46 AM  

eas81: Bumblefark: valkore: thrasherrr: though how the hell people use 25 GB of storage over a 802.1bgn wireless network is still a mystery to me

Thousands of pointless pictures saved at full resolution, days' worth of uncompressed mediocre music, and wobbly, grainy video footage shot at 1080p.

...and porn. Lots and lots and lots of porn.

[www.secuk.org image 300x233]

You must be new to the internets:

[37prime.com image 850x478]


Your picture make my point.   Nobody is syncing that to the cloud at 384kbs upload speed. If they did, they'd never get it to their iPad through wireless.

/also that guy's audio collection is meagre
 
2014-07-08 10:09:30 AM  

valkore: dittybopper: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 754x252]

Ding ding ding.  Basically, if you have critical businesses services in "the cloud", you have zero control over performance or security and are at the provider's mercy.  Your power is limited to the contract written totally in the cloud provider's favor, assuming you even went so far as to go through a contracting process and not just accept the equivalent of a EULA when you signed up your company for EZCloud or whatever buzzworthy named provider is out there to throw your critical data.  And, your damages are most likely limited to the amount of money you spent for the cloud subscription.  Paid $600 for a year's worth of SupraCloud services which went down at the 60% mark of your annual contract and cost you $40,000 in business?  Too bad, here's your $260 pro-rated refund check for the remainder of your contract.  Otherwise, talk to our cadre of lawyers that will cost you $40,001 to resolve, assuming you pass the arbitration process.  Oh, and if you want your data back, you'll have to provide your first and second born children, up front.

"Cloud" is great, until it isn't.


yeah EULA's and SLA's are basically worthless in the real world. I live in Dallas and back when I was doing the sort of thing I toured a lot of datacenters. I would ask them about disaster recovery and they would go on and on about contracts with fuel providers and SLA's with the local power telco etc. All that paper isn't going to mean shiat to me when a tornado rolls through and tears this place apart and my business is completely offline.

So pretty much what you said, "cloud" works well for what it does but know your requirements and design accordingly. At the end of the day, your business is your responsibility.
 
2014-07-08 10:29:18 AM  

valkore: "Cloud" is great, until it isn't.


As qorkfiend said, it's a tool. It's appropriate for some things but not for others. You seem very worried about lack of recourse with hosting/cloud providers, but it's not like you have any guarantee against your own IT staff screwing things up. And your only recourse there is to fire the person. When someone pins their entire business on some cheap consumer-grade cloud service, how is that any different than keeping everything on one server in the storage room with no offsite backup? If you have a poor IT plan and go cheap, you're going to have a bad outcome whichever way you go.

I've heard the "loss of control" argument a lot and it's valid in some contexts, but for many business it doesn't really matter. In-house IT infrastructure has high initial fixed costs, made even higher if you're looking for the availability that cloud services offer.  The misperception of risk when it comes to hosted/cloud versus in-house is very similar to the plane versus car argument. People don't like to fly because of "loss of control" and you always hear about it when a plane (or AWS Northern Virginia) goes down, but you don't hear about the 4,000,000 auto accidents (or in-house system outages) that occur in between the major events you do hear about.

The fact is that hosted/cloud providers can do a better job, and at lower cost, than many small businesses at running their IT infrastructure. And for businesses that require in-house infrastructure, do they really need it for everything? Probably not. Many IT departments and staff tend to panic and get defensive when they hear "cloud", and start a litany of what-ifs with all the terrible consequences of failure while leaving out the costs and problems associated with in-house infrastructure. Some things are better done internally, some things are better done hiring out. Smart IT departments will learn the differences and take advantage of them before some random consultant comes in, wows senior management and ends up taking things too far.

Full disclosure, I do not work for nor have any stake in hosted or cloud providers. I'm on the other side; I'm in the IT department at my organization and we're moving a lot of services into hosted/cloud environments due to the nature of our work, the global (and often remote) distribution of our staff, and the fact that we don't have the budget/staffing to provide all the requested services in-house.
 
2014-07-08 08:34:45 PM  
I'm wondering if business interruption insurance policies can now cover these services. When I last looked there were no policies to cover internet stuff at all. You couldn't even get liability insurance that would cover things like an employee screwing up and pissing off someone online who decides to sue the company. I have a totally separate corporation set up simply to hold my domains for business purposes, which my other company pays for so that if something happens online they have to go after the essentially asset-free corporation. There was one policy I could buy, if I was in Canada, through Lloyds (which isn't insurance anyway under US regulations) but nothing to cover any online activities. If I had my own IT department (say, my own server) and that died, it would be covered by business interruption insurance if it was due to something completely outside my control. Cloud hosted services? Not covered, as that is online activity which at the time was explicitly not covered by any policy by any company I could find.

Normally business interruption insurance covers fixed expenses while a facility is unable to operate due to covered or non-excluded events, often covering times when someone else causes the problem. For example a power plant goes down. Or the city decides to spend a year rebuilding the intersection one's business is on. I'm going to go ask some folks I know if cloud services are covered or not these days. If so I might have some new directions to go in. The problem is that insurance only applies to risks that can have actuarial tables built for them and nobody knew what liability might entail, or what business services like cloud services really are worth. Without court cases, bills and receipts, etc they can't establish actuarial tables. And I haven't seen any indication that they have made progress in that direction.

If cloud services aren't covered by that kind of insurance, that tells me the market isn't mature enough for a small business to rely on it solely. It means nobody is sure what the established failure rate is or the costs that arise from failures. Of course I use "small business" in the non-SBA sense, as they would consider many of the factories I deliver to as small businesses. I'm talking a couple of households depending solely on the business as income, with their assets pretty much tied to the success of the entity. I used to work for a very successful internet retailer in a niche market, and this was a constant worry for them. They were "very successful" compared with their competitors, who never lasted more than a year. In fact they were trend-setters, manufacturers would go to them at industry conferences and use their requests to set the standards for the next year. But it was a very small company, staffed mostly by family. Very big fish in a tiny pond, and that meant high visibility without high enough returns to fend off potential lawsuits by others with bigger pockets. And no liability insurance worth a damn since business and marketing was all conducted online and so were excluded from coverage. Very nice people but they were very aware that nothing is innocuous, and even the highest diligence eventually can let something actionable through.
 
Displayed 24 of 24 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report