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

"Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

mastodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 401 posts

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#261

Post by throwaway2037 »

endgame wrote: post #37
KingOfCoders wrote: post #19

Whenever I ask a CTO if they have a backup (or plan-B) they say we're on AWS, we backup there and they will never go down as a company. And then I ask them what they do when their account gets shut (e.g. because they are selling something bad on Amazon and have the same phone number as the company account?) Or the instance some years ago where GCP closed because someone had wrongly classified image on their drive? Yo…

https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/detail... Google Cloud accidentally wiped an Australian super[annuation] (pension) fund's entire cloud deployment earlier this year. I think that if you really want durable backups, they have to be reducible to object storage and put in someone else's cloud.

Thank you to share that blog post. That blog post specifically mentioned that no data was lost. I am confused by your comment about durable backups. Deeper question: Do people think on-prem backups are more reliable than cloud? I would say for 95% of orgs: no.

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#262

Post by throwaway2037 »

doublerabbit wrote: post #200
jimjimwii wrote: post #169

Backups are irrelevent here (yes, backups are important). if hetzner really deleted production data without warning or providing a grace period for their customer to migrate their data, then they are simply not a stable foundation to build on. I have never been a customer of google cloud for this reason and i sure as hell wont deploy new servers on hetzner until they provide a clear statement on what went wrong and w…

> they are simply not a stable foundation to build on. They're a budget host, you should always proceed with caution and never rely on for production. It's the same as buying a second hand eBay server to host users upon. I learnt that the hard way. > Hetzner, the ball is in your court. Not really. If you read the T&C, you'll find that they can do anything with the server. From their T&C: 2.7. Furthermore, we reserve…

Not to dump on Hetzner here, but we have no idea if these T&C's are even applicable by local laws in Germany/Finland/Arstotzka/etc. Many less reputable companies put all kinds of unenforceable bullshit into their T&C's.

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#263

Post by throwaway2037 »

egorfine wrote: post #161
benterix wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only use them for money-making projetcs. Based on my own experience and what I read online, you need to be careful with: * crypto mining (I used it when it wasn't causing much trouble but I noticed my nodes were constantly attacked at a ratio I newer saw for other servers); IIRC Hetzner's current ToS forbid crypto mining * things in legally grey area which might be legal in some places but not so in others, especia…

Their ToS forbids not just the crypto mining (that was extremely reasonable to ban ten years ago, but it's moot today) but also some arbitrary financial technologies they don't like. So beware of their ToS.

    > also some arbitrary financial technologies they don't like
Such as?

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#264

Post by throwaway2037 »

sertraline wrote: post #40
jumperabg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you ride the cloud/ai hype wave you end up with making fast and not very healthy decisions. Same things happen with other providers so whatever is your choice you must have disaster recovery and replication in place. If you wanna go cheap just make some s3 backups on R2, BackBlaze, Wasabi.

Hetzner was always like that, even before the AI wave. They lowball people with cheap pricing and arguably this attracts a lot of "unwanted" people, so Hetzner always acted strict on such issues. Last time I used them (pre-2020) they were going as far as requesting customer's ID and rejecting them on the basis of country of origin, and I assume this also includes facial features that may resemble "an average scammer"…

    > they were going as far as requesting customer's ID and rejecting them on the basis of country of origin
Wouldn't this be required for most cloud providers? Else, how do filter out buyers from Iran, Syria, or North Korea, who are probably banned from buying your EU-based services?

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#265

Post by throwaway2037 »

rozap wrote: post #227

Heh, this happened to me the other day. I had hooked it up to paypal and didn't realize it wasn't set up to autopay, so I had an outstanding balance of $8 for about a week and they nuked everything. It was just for a hobby project so it was no big deal and I'll provision a new server with them, but I'm not sure I'd use them for a serious project, even though their prices are good. Granted, if it was for a serious pro…

Did you get any warning emails?

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#266

Post by r3trohack3r »

buran77 wrote: post #216
r3trohack3r wrote: post #210

After their experience with targeted "deplatforming" rumble started its own cloud: https://www.rumble.cloud/

And their T&C have the same termination clause as anyone else. > 6. Termination > The Provider may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason, with or without notice to the Adopter. Adopter may terminate the Services upon notice to the Provider.

Ouch, that’s a bummer

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#268

Post by evoke4908 »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #19

Whenever I ask a CTO if they have a backup (or plan-B) they say we're on AWS, we backup there and they will never go down as a company. And then I ask them what they do when their account gets shut (e.g. because they are selling something bad on Amazon and have the same phone number as the company account?) Or the instance some years ago where GCP closed because someone had wrongly classified image on their drive? Yo…

My CEO has been letting the AWS bill go unpaid, apparently not understanding that our entire business and all of our IP will simply vanish if our S3 bucket gets deleted. Zero backups of any kind

I manually pulled a backup of everything but jeez, not good.

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#269

Post by fireant »

movedx wrote: post #249
hmmm-i-wonder wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've gone the route of multiple AWS accounts in my company to avoid the issue they introduced with horrible planning. First they wanted us out of on-premise, and told us costs wouldn't matter. Then they wanted us to be 'cloud agnostic', but when given deadlines changed to 'get it working in AWS ASAP, doesn't matter the tech debt' Now they're freaking out about AWS costs, and we're back to juggling 'cloud agnostic'…

The biggest issue I see here is the misguided assumption that Cloud is just automatically and unilaterally better than on-premise or professionally managed, hosted hardware. This isn't true in most cases. There are so many providers, and therefore examples, of physical tin being accessible in under a minute with cost:hardware ratios that blow Cloud out if the sky (pun! ha!) OVH have a server for USD $95/month (with n…

People on HN refuse to see this being an option in these discussions. Is either "cloud" or "build and manage your own physical rack inside a colo housing"

Re: "Hetzner decided to cancel our account and terminate all servers"

#270

Post by cutemonster »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #218
Terr_ wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused, it sounds like you're saying the same tape was being ejected every week and then reinserted without any rotation. But in that case, shouldn't the weekly backup process have failed because the tape was full? Was nobody getting those alerts? Or do you mean the backup process was fine, but they restored from the wrong media, a very old tape that was about to be overwritten, instead of retrieving the one wi…

no, the first Sunday night after the backup process completed. It ejected the tape. It sat there for years until someone realized they needed to restore from the most recent backup. Since a new tape was never inserted, the backup was from years ago.

What happened afterwards? Was that manager still at the company, at that time?
Post reply on HN