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

Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

cloudirregular.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 457 posts

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#81

Post by ta988 »

HomeDeLaPot wrote: post #19

Is there seriously no way in AWS/Azure/GCP to specify "Here's my budget, shut everything down if I exceed $X"? I don't use those platforms much but was always surprised I couldn't find anything like that right off the bat. I'll build cloud stuff if it makes sense at work, but if I'm footing the bill I'll stick to something that can provide an actual upper limit.

You can get alerts. And there are some limits for young accounts. But they really need a "beginner" mode. Or a budget mode, put $x on the account can't spend more. But I guess they are making a lot of money with "mistakes" so there may not be kuch incentives

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#83

Post by Silhouette »

maxgashkov wrote: post #60
HomeDeLaPot wrote: post #19

Is there seriously no way in AWS/Azure/GCP to specify "Here's my budget, shut everything down if I exceed $X"? I don't use those platforms much but was always surprised I couldn't find anything like that right off the bat. I'll build cloud stuff if it makes sense at work, but if I'm footing the bill I'll stick to something that can provide an actual upper limit.

That’s extremely hard to design, at least with the current state of what AWS bills and does not bill. Example: let’s assume you’ve set the cut-off budget too strict, spun off another shard for your stateful service (DB for example), it received and stored some data during the short window before some other service brought whole account over budget (i.e. paid egress crossed the threshold). To bring VM and EBS charges…

Yes, a useful last resort safeguard would need to be more granular than just "turn everything off", at least if we're talking about protecting production systems rather than just people learning and wanting to avoid inadvertently leaving the free tier or something like that.

Still, it's not hard to imagine some simple refinements that might be practical. For example, an option to preserve data in DB or other storage services but stop all other activity might be a useful safety net for a lot of AWS customers. It wouldn't cut costs to 0, but that's not necessarily the optimal outcome for customers running in production anyway. It would probably mitigate the greatest risks of runaway costs, though.

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#84

Post by yawnxyz »

I've stayed away from AWS for these reasons. Instead I use systems on top of AWS, like Vercel etc.

Is it ironic that Amazon's mantra is to be "Customer obsessed" yet AWS is so magnificently confusing for anyone not doing it full-time?

As a designer I've used plenty of Digital Ocean, Vercel, Cloudflare Workers and other static hosts without a problem... I've never been able to figure out how to even start on AWS, and all these horror stories constantly make sure I stay away

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#85

Post by thedevelopnik »

paaakthecaaa wrote: post #74
artichokeheart wrote: post #24

AWS employs cost obfuscation by design otherwise the default view when you open the console would show you all of your current active services. Not only is that not the case, a single screen to show you all of your current active services doesn't exist. You need to take a deep dive into cost explorer (assuming you have access in corporate land) and try to decipher in what that all means.

They definitely need a senior executive to stand up and say, "The Customer wants us to be transparent in billing, fix that now." Then they need to start a team dedicated to finding a good way to let customers halt spending at a given limit with minimal impact on their operations. They already win on UX (okay, okay, it's an opinion ffs), but unlimited liability makes a lot of people very uncomfortable. Those two actio…

I’m not trying to be snarky here, would like an honest opinion: how do they win on UX? Are there specific things you like there?

I’ve used all three major clouds in production now and I dread using the AWS console. Or really any part of it, over Azure or GCP.

I’ve always thought of them as purely winning the “nobody got fired for…” mindshare thing despite having a thoroughly mediocre product.

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#86

Post by cesarb »

maxgashkov wrote: post #60
HomeDeLaPot wrote: post #19

Is there seriously no way in AWS/Azure/GCP to specify "Here's my budget, shut everything down if I exceed $X"? I don't use those platforms much but was always surprised I couldn't find anything like that right off the bat. I'll build cloud stuff if it makes sense at work, but if I'm footing the bill I'll stick to something that can provide an actual upper limit.

That’s extremely hard to design, at least with the current state of what AWS bills and does not bill. Example: let’s assume you’ve set the cut-off budget too strict, spun off another shard for your stateful service (DB for example), it received and stored some data during the short window before some other service brought whole account over budget (i.e. paid egress crossed the threshold). To bring VM and EBS charges…

> So, to fully comply w/o risking losing customer data, AWS will have to stop charging for not running instances and inactive EBS volumes which most definitely bring on many kinds of abuse.

Another option would be to "reserve" them in the budget. That is, when for instance you create a 10 GB EBS volume, count it in the budget as if it will be kept for the whole month (and all months after that). Yes, that would mean an EBS volume costing $X per day would count in the budget as 31*$X, but it would prevent both going over the limit and having to lose data.

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#87

Post by koolba »

kossTKR wrote: post #55

Lots of companies also gets hacked each month for thousands of dollars because some key to S3 with too many privileges gets leaked. The entire system is completely sinister. The fact that keys pertaining to S3 has anything do with being able to start hundreds of VM's in different parts of the AWS system or do whatever is bad. I've seen companies be ruined by this, and it's in no way obvious how stupid their system is…

> Instead of starting with "no access" then adding atomized access you have to understand this extremely complex "json privilege system". Instead of just programming, this is the only allowed IP, the is the only allowed bucket, this is the only allowed service, ...

What would that look like if it’s not going to be a series of access permissions and filters represented as JSON?

Security is never a simple checkbox and complaints like this about it needing to be simpler need to be backed up with an alternative. I genuinely wonder what alternative there is to the current permissions model.

It’s incredibly expressive and doesn’t take that long to understand. People who cannot master it would likely leave some other side door open anyway.

> ... and my max is 200usd, or something to that effect.

This has been a valid complaint for years. Though to solve it you need to answer what happens to legit resources when your billing cap is reached. Do all your ephemeral serves turn off? Do your EBs volumes all her deleted? Do your S3 objects all disappear?

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#88

Post by ihuman »

eric4smith wrote: post #20
harry8 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>DigitalOcean is the worst with the dormant accounts. Just got dinged around $2.40 on my credit card. Going into DO I could not find what was causing that charge. There was nothing there. Wuuuttttt. Wuuuttt? Fraud is what.

I would not go that far to say it's fraud. Calm down. Maybe it's something I missed. Maybe its some hidden feature that I did not turn off. But I deleted all my droplets, all my IP's all my firewalls, etc, etc and could not find anything else.

The invoices on the billing page break down where the charges came from. If you download the pdf version, it has even more details.

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#89

Post by dotproto »

paaakthecaaa wrote: post #74
artichokeheart wrote: post #24

AWS employs cost obfuscation by design otherwise the default view when you open the console would show you all of your current active services. Not only is that not the case, a single screen to show you all of your current active services doesn't exist. You need to take a deep dive into cost explorer (assuming you have access in corporate land) and try to decipher in what that all means.

They definitely need a senior executive to stand up and say, "The Customer wants us to be transparent in billing, fix that now." Then they need to start a team dedicated to finding a good way to let customers halt spending at a given limit with minimal impact on their operations. They already win on UX (okay, okay, it's an opinion ffs), but unlimited liability makes a lot of people very uncomfortable. Those two actio…

"They already win on UX"

As someone that has tried and failed to get some small personal sites running on AWS a couple times, I'm going to have to tag this snippet with [citation needed].

Re: Please fix the AWS free tier before somebody gets hurt

#90

Post by maxgashkov »

coderintherye wrote: post #73
maxgashkov wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s extremely hard to design, at least with the current state of what AWS bills and does not bill. Example: let’s assume you’ve set the cut-off budget too strict, spun off another shard for your stateful service (DB for example), it received and stored some data during the short window before some other service brought whole account over budget (i.e. paid egress crossed the threshold). To bring VM and EBS charges…

A complicated solution is not what people are really asking for though. What I and I expect most people want is a cap which then spins down services when they reach that cap. Nobody is going to care if the cap is set to $1000 and the final bill is $1,020. The problem being solved for is not wanting to have to ever worry about missing an alert and waking up to a bill that is a factor or two beyond expectations. I can…

I do understand that, but there are services that are still billed for when ‘spun down’. To stop getting the bills they have to be terminated.

The solution seems to be to implement ‘emergency stop’ when whole account is put to pause but no state is purged. And then you’ll probably have a week or two to react and decide if you want larger bill, salvage the data or just terminate it all.

Post reply on HN