Live data from Hacker News

Serverless Horrors

serverlesshorrors.com

171–174 of 174 posts

Re: Serverless Horrors

#171
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will have to pay it AND a fee for fraud, and possibly their legal fees for tracking you down. You also will have a difficult time arguing that you were in good faith with this kind of shenanigans. Bouncing checks are not a life hack to get stuff for free, they're a crime.

I thought they were the ones committing fraud ... either way you have to be crazy to subscribe to those services

Not really, no. Fraud requires intent.

Re: Serverless Horrors

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about static content. I need the whole enchilada: DB, Web Server, Dynamic Languages, etc. Also, for a shipping, production application, with hundreds of users; where privacy and security are of paramount importance. It's easy, sure. It's easy to create an insecure server, that can be pwned. I know of which I speak. I have done just that. "A man who holds a cat by the tail, learns a lesson he can learn…

It's easy to create a secure server. Use private keys. Use a firewall (ufw is really simple) and only expose your reverse proxy (e.g nginx or haproxy). Use docker to run your crap. Any software engineer should be well capable of setting up a secure server. It really is simple.

The minute you implement a firewall, you failed

Firewalls are made for two things:

  - packets alteration (iptable table mangle)
  - applying filtering on behalf of a badly configured OS
So, if your case and if you want to prevent remote access to your database, you have a bad way: create a firewall rule to drop connections to tcp/3306

And you have a good way: configure your sql to bind to ::1

The firewall way requires two configuration (hence: complexity) and hide your intent : the mysql say : "I accept connections from everybody", and then the firewall say "I deny all connections".

While the good way is clear and sane : one component who say : "I only accept connections from localhost"

Re: Serverless Horrors

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oooh i really like that stop loss example. having a netlify serverless website is basically selling a put option without receiving any premium.

Selling a put has a fixed downside, so perhaps selling a naked call would be more appropriate? Unlimited loss potential! :^)

[dead]
Post reply on HN