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

Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

blog.railway.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 279 posts

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#231

Post by kjs3 »

bagels wrote: post #188
shwetanshu21 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In May 2024, Google Cloud Platform (GCP) accidentally deleted the private cloud account and all backups belonging to UniSuper, an Australian pension fund managing over $125 billion.

I think that stretches what it means for a company to "be" a 125b company, but that is still awful.

They are a pension fund; they literally had/have US$125 billion dollars under management. What exactly is being stretched here? I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#232

Post by tw04 »

shwetanshu21 wrote: post #47

This should be a warning to anyone running GCP. They suspend accounts left right and centre without even thinking about what they're doing. It seems like they use Gemini 3.1 Pro to run their production decisions. TK has a history of absolutely destroying the culture of the place like in OCI and has done something similar in GCP from what I've heard. GCP and Google are completely different entities with how they work.…

> Don't expect Google quality from the name.

Google “quality”? We’re talking about the same company that has killed off dozens of useful apps? The company that’s made 6 different chat apps? The one who will kill user accounts with no recourse or person to call?

GCP literally had to spend the last 5 years trying to convince enterprises everywhere that they were nothing like Google proper. I’m not sure the last time you left Silicon Valley, but Google’s name across the test of the US was synonymous with flaky commercial products that might not exist a year from now.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#234

Post by linkregister »

daninsea wrote: post #83
Animats wrote: post #15

"Finally, we are in planning to remove Google Cloud services from our data plane’s hot path, and keeping them only for secondary/failover." That's pretty clear. Google can no longer be trusted as a B2B service provider.

Railway don't have a great reputation for building scalable systems (effects of vibe coding?). It's worth waiting for Google's response before jumping to conclusions. They can move to Azure/AWS/own datacenter, but there's a good chance this will repeat in a few months.

I understand this opinion, because their API keys / OAuth tokens had no permissions structure, so a user of the Railway MCP had their infrastructure destroyed by an overzealous LLM agent. However, this is orthogonal to their infrastructure capabilities.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#235

Post by stingraycharles »

okanat wrote: post #185
potatoman22 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google should know why a human accepted the automated suggestion, or if and why there wasn't any human oversight in the first place.

Google knows and wants that there is no oversight. Don't do business with any big tech, if you don't want this kind of incidents.

AWS and Microsoft don’t do this, not like this.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#236

Post by stingraycharles »

QuercusMax wrote: post #100
gandreani wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But...AWS is a platform too, no? Seems like you're in the same category of risk you just moved to a more well-known name. Granted, Amazon is the most reliable even if they have their own quirks.

Each critical dependency you stack multiplies your risk. Now you have to worry about Railway AND Google causing business-damaging outages.

I was looking at this from Railway’s perspective. I really wonder what caused their account to be flagged, and they hint at more accounts being erroneously flagged as well.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#237

Post by ianburrell »

kjs3 wrote: post #231
bagels wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that stretches what it means for a company to "be" a 125b company, but that is still awful.

They are a pension fund; they literally had/have US$125 billion dollars under management. What exactly is being stretched here? I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets .

Companies are described by revenue. UniSuper made $110 million recently. It deceptive to use the assets managed as the size since it makes it look like a much larger company. NVIDIA has revenue of $130 billion. $125 billion revenue would make it the largest company in Australia by a good amount.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#238

Post by bmandale »

kjs3 wrote: post #231
bagels wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that stretches what it means for a company to "be" a 125b company, but that is still awful.

They are a pension fund; they literally had/have US$125 billion dollars under management. What exactly is being stretched here? I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets .

Having assets under management doesn't mean you have that money. You don't own it, you are just taking care of it for somebody. When describing a company as an $X billion company, conventionally this is referring to the market cap. You could use it to describe other things they possess if you wanted to, but assets they manage will never be something they possess.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#239

Post by lmm »

kjs3 wrote: post #231
bagels wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that stretches what it means for a company to "be" a 125b company, but that is still awful.

They are a pension fund; they literally had/have US$125 billion dollars under management. What exactly is being stretched here? I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets .

> I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets.

Which this company didn't. They managed 125b of assets belonging to other people, they didn't have 125b of their own.

Re: Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

#240

Post by ihsw »

subscribed wrote: post #123
matsemann wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, people loose their business because a kid is logged in on their iPad, gets their google account suspended, and google knows it's the same household as the parent, and everything gets shut down

Can't find this now but google did at least once disable company's accounts after dev got their account suspended. And as we know from the recent Gemini ban wave, you can get suspended just because.

[dead]
Post reply on HN