@jubes have a look at the #Amazon pull-down here: https://codeberg.org/swiso/website/issues/141
@resist1984 I'm not excusing Amazon's misbehaviours but from a technical perspective I don't think it's foolish, it was either poor design or ignorance. The article posted indicates the leak was from an open S3 buckets which is the end users issue not Amazon's.
@resist1984 Fair point, but insider threat is a risk which affects all businesses. You can also use standard Public Key Infrastructure to secure data so you don't need to trust Amazon if you're going to use them for storage. In addition, from what I understand the Capital One breach wasn't due to untrustworthy insiders, it was due to a misconfigured Web Application Firewall (ModSecurity) which in turn allowed for Server Side Request Forgery.
@jubes Is Capone, Amazon-Swiggy-Juspay, & Liberapay only using AWS for storage? AWS is also a hosting service, so I thought AWS was where these financial services ran their web server. The Capital One attack was executed by a contractor who worked for Amazon. Perhaps their insider access gave awareness of the malconfig.
@jubes #Liberapay uses #CloudFlare (a recipe for disaster in itself), so we're blocked from checking the hosting provider, but Liberapay bluntly states that #AMZN is their hosting provider. It's a given that a service must trust their own insiders, but making a tech giant an insider kills trust particularly given a history of breaches.
@jubes It's far easier for a manager to justify the choice to outsource than it is to take responsibility for an internal disaster where you had control over all the moving parts. Managers don't get sacked for the mere decision to outsource, so outsourcing is the /safest/ path.. the path of least risk for a manager's job security.
@jubes As someone worked in the trenches of several fortune 500 corps, I've been forced to interact with incompetent services & poorly designed tools to interface w/those svcs many times. The waste is stark yet hard to quantify mathematically (& if it were quantified there's not generally a path to present it to upper management - such trouble makers risk getting cut loose)
@jubes when a small company outsources to CloudFlare, they're often over-estimating the threat of outsider attack while under-estimating the threat of CF compromise (cloudbleed or CF exploiting the data). And if the threat manifests into a DoS attack, admins usually aren't aware that CF is non-gratis for high traffic.
@jubes I think clever web design can mitigate the perceived need for #CloudFlare. E.g. code image dimensions into the html so the important content can quickly render before the images. Use #SBLAM (#CAPTCHA alternative) on pages with form input. Failing that, CF has competitors that are more worthy, who don't attack your own users as a consequence of their sloppy technique.
@resist1984 Apologise, I'm not sure how to interpret this. As a manager, i'd still be held responsible my "choices". There are also plenty of other reasons why oursourcing is a good thing e.g. reducing overheads if you're a small business.