Thread

AWS says it can't restore some data from mideast facilities struck by Iran

530 points · 452 comments · berkeleyjunk

cmiles8 · 1789596948 · focus · HN ↗
This interview with an AWS leader isn’t aging well, from CBS Sunday morning:
Pogue asked, "I don't mean to give anyone ideas, but let's say I figured out that one of these unmarked buildings was an AWS data center, and I blew it up. Are you saying that it's so backed up and redundant that you probably wouldn't notice?" Wood replied, "Yeah, you wouldn't notice. I mean, we might be a bit upset, but you wouldn't notice!"
<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cloud-computing-loudoun-county-virginia/" rel="nofollow">https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cloud-computing-loudoun-county-...
1. krick · 1789598998 · focus · HN ↗
  That is actually surprising to me. Claims like that are pretty common, they make sense and they should be true, so even though I don't really know AWS (/Backblaze/Azure/whatever) redundancy planning in enough detail, I used to trust them. It's really worrying when they outright say it will be ok, and then a week later it turns out to be not ok.
  1. houssc · 1789599866 · focus · HN ↗
    The caveat is always "if you're using the service correctly" which is not necessarily free. Meaning taking advantage of multiple geo zones, building in redundancy to your stack, etc. Like everything he said is possible if your technology stack living in AWS was designed to survive it. Everyone who has ever had the "we lost your data" email from AWS knows at the end of the day the cloud is just someone else's data center with neat provisioning tools and services.
    jacquesm · 1789600529 · focus · HN ↗
    The problem is that lots of people seem to be under the impression that they are doing it right because they are using AWS. They don't realize that AWS is a toolbox, not a 'ready made solution for redundancy against all catastrophes you are possibly exposed to'. They use that to their advantage by pricing such solutions at a level that people will either pay through the nose or will be left without recourse when AWS loses their data. It's stupid, but at the same time these beliefs are surprisingly wide spread.
    Avicebron · 1789607483 · focus · HN ↗
    Not to be callous but even the 3-2-1 rule is pretty basic, the issue is that people don't apply it. But that's a hiring and strategy thing.
    SlightlyLeftPad · 1789608754 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
    rjbwork · 1789609614 · focus · HN ↗
    >Quite often a senior leadership issue because backing stuff up results in $$$ spent, which makes shareholders unhappy.
    This is true. The latter half of your comment is not. At best they have a duty to shareholders. But your assertion would mean every time a company posted a loss and the price went down the execs would be in legal trouble, which is nonsense.
    datadrivenangel · 1789612723 · focus · HN ↗
    Shareholder nuisance lawsuits can happen basically any time the stock goes down... or doesn't go up enough, and often companies will settle instead of the expensive fighting...
    SlightlyLeftPad · 1789613743 · focus · HN ↗
    There are grounds legally if shareholders can prove that the "long-term risk reduction" argument is a lie, they can sue under the Duty of Loyalty. In reality, yes, this amounts nuisance lawsuits, large settlements and disruption at the board level. In practice, this and the executive pay structures almost always incentivizes short-term decisions and these risks become problems “for the next person.”
    nixon_why69 · 1789627346 · focus · HN ↗
    This is Matt Levine's theory of "everything is securities fraud".
    Something bad happens, stock goes down, angry shareholders sue because they should have been told the bad thing would happen and the stock would go down.
    jasonkhanlar · 1789632752 · focus · HN ↗
    Shareholders? Hmmmm...
    <a href="https://secform4.com/insider-trading/1018724.htm" rel="nofollow">https://secform4.com/insider-trading/1018724.htm + <a href="https://i.imgur.com/tMBfGee.png" rel="nofollow">https://i.imgur.com/tMBfGee.png = ?
    Cue security entitlements, e.g. <a href="https://ndlegis.gov/assembly/69-2025/testimony/SJUD-2364-20250211-36358-F-ENGET_MARK.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://ndlegis.gov/assembly/69-2025/testimony/SJUD-2364-202...

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.