The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)
User: Not logged on
Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
User Info Are The Idiots On EC2 (and others) Ready?; entered at 2018-01-02 09:56:04
Tickerguy
Posts: 151178
Registered: 2007-06-26
Quote:
I was concerned when I heard our government parks classified data on cloud servers, so I asked my brother-in-law who sets up the encryption keys for government computer systems locally. He said their systems encrypt the data before it reaches the cloud which then encrypts the encrypted data.

Uh huh.

First, cloud storage of bulk data is always hideously expensive compared against doing it yourself. Always. As an example Digital Ocean charges 10 cents/GB/month for "block storage", and AWS is the same for "general purpose". High-performance on AWS is more expensive (DO wins there bigly because there's no charge for I/Os, but there is on AWS.)

AWS has HDD storage too and it's cheaper (about 1/2 to 1/4 of the above) but even so it's idiotic. Consider that a TB is 1,000GB, so you're paying $45/TB/month before any I/O or processing costs just to stash the data.

May I remind you that I can buy NAS-grade 6Tb disks for under $200? If you mirror (best performance and highest cost of the RAID options) that means it costs you $66/TB to buy the storage - and you pay ONCE. NAS-style drives are perfectly fine for "cold storage" type applications and even the most-expensive SAS/Helium-filled "really good ones" are about double that, which means for what you pay in THREE MONTHS in cloud storage cost you can buy the disks and own them. In other words it's roughly ten times as expensive in terms of life-cycle cost, if not more, to use cloud for this purpose -- and it just gets worse from there.

There's also no redundancy guarantee on the cloud providers either (they accept ZERO responsibility if they lose the data) so YOU get to either buy two or take the risk that whatever they did internally is "good enough" where if you provision your own (e.g. ZFS 2+2) you can lose ANY TWO of the four volumes and have no actual loss of data. Never mind that YOU control the storage encryption keys in such an application locally, NOT someone else.

There is an argument for cloud use where you have very "bursty" CPU requirements that are only necessary for a few hours a month.

There is NEVER an argument for it in the realm of bulk storage. EVER. Not only is it expensive as hell you lose ALL control over the security of said data.

Last modified: 2018-01-02 10:00:45 by tickerguy

2018-01-02 09:56:04