Live data from Hacker News

Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

propublica.org

241–249 of 249 posts

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#241
post #40

Recently tried using Entra ID. There are 12 ways to enforce MFA, 20 days ways to disable users, 4 ways to authenticate users, Add conditional access stuff with 50 variables and templates etc. You can customize the way you want. After configuring it, my colleagues could not log in. Thats one way to secure your organization.

Out of all the SSO login flows Microsoft has to have the buggiest. It’s the only one I can remember routinely having issues with. Why are there so many redirects? And why doesn’t the “remember me” checkbox ever work?

Remember me checkbox is the biggest lie. Okta is the same. I want to cry every time I see that login screen. It's few times a day. #security

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#243

The government does most things poorly and with little regard to budget or quality. They can't solve problems that are much simpler than cloud computing, so why should I expect them to perform better at a more complex problem?

[flagged]

Please don't engage in ideological battle on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for curious conversation here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#244

Azure is easily the most expensive, least reliable and worst cloud available. It's borderline scam. An example today, I provisioned high IOPS SSDs (supposedly) and what is actually connected to the instance? A spinning hard drive! I didn't even know they were still made, but I guess Azure uses them and scams their users into thinking you're getting an SSD for $700/mo when its really an old hard drive. I would warn an…

Azure using SRE, I call BS. You don’t see underlying storage, it’s mounted as either SCSI or NVMe device as one HD. It’s obviously backed by massive fleet of drives just like EBS.

I was wrong about it being a spinning disk, ROTA=1 is just how Linux reports Azure virtual disks. But the underlying frustration stands: my home NVMe does the same copy in a fraction of the time because it can do 500K+ IOPS with no virtualization overhead. Azure caps this "Premium SSD" at 7,500 IOPS, so a small-file-heavy copy crawls at 85 MB/s despite 250 MB/s provisioned throughput. You're paying SSD prices for artificially throttled performance — the hardware may be SSD, but the performance is just awful. Paying $900/month for the highest level Premium SSD, attached to a large instance, and it's significantly slower than a $200 SSD from 5 years ago.

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#245
post #105

I mean, they also bought the F-35.

In all fairness, the F-35 does what it says on the tin. Azure doesn't. That you bring this up says a lot more about you than government purchasing.

It does _now_, since the deliverable capabilities and pricing changed well after the ink on the contracts was dry. The F35 program was picked over by experts and denounced internally, but went forward as a purchase anyway.

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Azure using SRE, I call BS. You don’t see underlying storage, it’s mounted as either SCSI or NVMe device as one HD. It’s obviously backed by massive fleet of drives just like EBS.

I was wrong about it being a spinning disk, ROTA=1 is just how Linux reports Azure virtual disks. But the underlying frustration stands: my home NVMe does the same copy in a fraction of the time because it can do 500K+ IOPS with no virtualization overhead. Azure caps this "Premium SSD" at 7,500 IOPS, so a small-file-heavy copy crawls at 85 MB/s despite 250 MB/s provisioned throughput. You're paying SSD prices for art…

Sure the downside of virtualization is all disk calls are over the network which is way slower then local NVMe call. Upside is hardware failures are quickly handled.

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#248
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll do you one better: stealing the signing key was not even necessary. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/microsoft-ent...

I knew there was another incident that I was forgetting, insanity... I don't understand how Microsoft keeps getting away with this and everyone just forgets.

Microsoft has a very good PR department: they invest a lot in lobby/corruption, they pay for articles in big media companies. And Microsoft is too big to fail.

Re: Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

#249
post #8

The Justice Department CIO who pressured FedRAMP to approve GCC High was hired by Microsoft the next year. I wonder if this shouldn't invalidate the authorization in the first place?

No. We live in a democracy. Everyone can work where he wants. See Poettering. Or US generals who went to work for Pentagon contractors. Or politicians who work/have worked/will work for private companies which benefitted from laws enacted by those politicians.
Post reply on HN