Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

digitalcameraworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 419 posts

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#391

Post by nix23 »

slim wrote: post #385
rsync wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do any cloud providers create backups on top of replication though?" We do.[1] For exactly 1.75x our normal pricing, we will replicate your entire account, nightly, to a geo-redundant site which is not open for normal customer use (and, therefore, has a lower risk profile). This GR site is the he.net core datacenter, in Fremont. It's also worth pointing out that replication to rsync.net buys you malware/ransomware p…

No you don't. What would you do if all the files of your customers that did not pay for backups are lost ?

>customers that did not pay for backups are lost

But they pay for it.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#392

Post by nix23 »

pravda wrote: post #334
_nato_ wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an event when a startup I was at asked Basho (they were the company behind Riak db) about backing up our data. Backing was a little side-feature that was possible to rig up, but I recall they looked at this inquiry as if I had two heads -- as if to say, it's replicated, why jump the shark? There was a bug with one of the Riak releases, and all the data was lost. (When we scaled up with this buggy Riak relea…

BTsync did that to me! One computer had a hard drive failure, BTSync deleted all the files from the computer that didn't. Doubleplus ungood.

Thats why syncronisation/replication is NOT a Backup.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#393

Post by nix23 »

virgilp wrote: post #349
nix23 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> privacy Encryption? > legal (GDPR) You dont have to delete offline backups...never heard of such a case > cost etc. Cheaper than loose your customer's data wich they trust you with. EDIT: If you can delete a backup it's not a backup.

Under GDPR "right to be forgotten", you have to delete backups, can't keep them forever - see https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... There are alternatives (one of which is to encrypt the backed up data & just throw away the encryption keys instead) but of course those incur additional costs > Cheaper than loose your customer's data wich they trust you with. This is just opinion. And also it'…

>you have to delete backups, can't keep them forever

>>The key issue is to put the backup data ‘beyond use’, even if it cannot be immediately overwritten.

It's clear that you cannot delete WORM-tapen with many other data on it.

>This is just opinion.

Not for a file hosting service, the customer trusts you to do your job.

>If it gets destroyed, is it a backup?

Destroyed means physikal interaction, since it is not possible to make a reallife backup this is you last line of defence.

>Can your backups be accidentally destroyed?

Well if someone "accidentally" breaks into my bank opens the right tresor and "accidentally" uses a flametrower..the you are right.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#394

Post by danielheath »

zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #300
reaperducer wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know much about S3, but isn't S3, by definition, online, not offline?

I’ve always wondered if Amazon backs up S3. I don’t think they explicitly say but I get the impression that it is the user’s responsibility to replicate to a second region to guard against data loss so I am guessing not. Object Lock wouldn’t protect against an S3 failure.

As far as I can tell it’s replicated (by default - see “reduced redundancy storage”), not backed up.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#395

Post by galoisgirl »

strombofulous wrote: post #362
galoisgirl wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know that? Gitlab had 5 backups and could restore none.

Is it a backup if it can't be used like one?

It is and is not at the same time until you try to restore it.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#396

Post by jiofih »

CydeWeys wrote: post #245
xnyan wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they don't have a working smoke alarm, or are storing flammable materials over the burner, or don't have enough emergency exits then no, they should not do reservations at all. It seems Canon did not have a backup, they had replication of data. If you are storing data for money, then this is a professionally negligent behavior. Not being able to prepare for everything is not an valid excuse to not prepare for what…

What does adherence to fire code have anything to do with taking reservations? Also, reservations are free . It's not reasonable to expect restaurants to do anything and everything to honor 100% of reservations when many customers never show up for them and don't have any skin in the game anyway. Whatever point is trying to be made here is going out the window thanks to the "zero 9" nature of restaurant reservations.…

Indeed, it has nothing to do with taking reservations, but providing service which is the crux of the issue. If they accept customers while knowingly not following fire regulations, then yes, it’s wrong and unethical; similar thinking should apply to software services.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#397

Post by rasmore »

They’re paying for the negligence against software developers. Those two incidents come down to the design flaws after all. The CEOs of Canon Inc and Canon USA are too old to admit the fact that software is more powerful than what it used to be when the hardware was selling well simply owing to its pure performance and features and the software was just a driver. You would be surprised if I tell you how many skilled software engineers have left the companies in the last three years. What makes things worse is that the old men aren’t aware of why they left.

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#398

Post by akerro »

hinkley wrote: post #379
akerro wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sound similar to "junior dev had access to prod database" scenario which really isn't engineering mistake but process/administration.

I knew a guy who used a different color scheme for terminal sessions connected to production servers, so he didn’t do something in the wrong window. A guy. One. How many people have I met with shell access to production servers?

I have all hosts share the same .zshrc and config with yadm, so all terminals look the same and share keyboard shortcuts. My oh-my-zsh with powerlevel10k is configured in a similar way: when I'm connected by ssh to a host it shows hostname@domain or hostname@ip on RIGHT side of a screen. It's not much, but it's easily visible, sometimes even annoying, but at least I never deleted wrong docker images from dev :)

Re: Canon's cloud platform has lost users' files and can't restore them

#399

Post by hatsunearu »

bscphil wrote: post #373
hatsunearu wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even open source programs, like RawTherapee and Darktable, use entirely different and incompatible approaches, algorithms, and instructions. `git checkout v3.0.2` `./build.sh` No idea what you're talking about. As long as you have your RAWs and your sidecar file you can trivially reproduce the picture, at least that's how it works in darktable. Hell, the old code that is deprecated and "hidden" in the newest versio…

I mean that RawTherapee and Darktable don't use the same code as each other at all. The instructions (usually sidecar files) the tell each program what to do to generate the output are completely incompatible. > the old code that is deprecated and "hidden" in the newest versions is actually all still there and if you import your stuff in the newest version I'd expect this to be the case with any good photo developer,…

> I mean that RawTherapee and Darktable don't use the same code as each other at all. The instructions (usually sidecar files) the tell each program what to do to generate the output are completely incompatible.

I'll be honest, this is probably the most ridiculous argument against anything I've ever heard on hacker news. This is like saying C/gcc sucks because Javascript exists. What the fuck?

> I'd expect this to be the case with any good photo developer, but it doesn't pay to take chances. There have been significant bugs in the past with DNG files, for example, and different bugs could be introduced in the future, or bugs you didn't know about could be fixed, and so on. There's a lot of stuff that could go wrong. It's good to be able to just tar the source code.

So... it's a non issue? I don't even...

Post reply on HN