Earlier quoted context omitted.
DigitalOcean lost some of my files in their object storage too: https://status.digitalocean.com/incidents/tmnyhddpkyvf Using a commercial provider is not a guarantee.
DO Spaces, for at least a year after launch, had no durability guarantees whatsoever. Perhaps they do now, but I wouldn’t compare DO in any meaningful way to S3, which has crazy high durability guarantees as well as competent engineering effort expended on designing and validating that durability.
Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
501–510 of 987 posts
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#502The government official who insisted that commercial AWS/GCP/Azure couldn't possibly be trusted with keeping the information will be keeping their head low for a few days then... "The Interior Ministry explained that while most systems at the Daejeon data center are backed up daily to separate equipment within the same center and to a physically remote backup facility, the G-Drive’s structure did not allow for extern…
Agree completely that it's absolute wild to run such a system without backups. But at this point no government should keep critical data on foreign cloud storage.
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#503The government official who insisted that commercial AWS/GCP/Azure couldn't possibly be trusted with keeping the information will be keeping their head low for a few days then... "The Interior Ministry explained that while most systems at the Daejeon data center are backed up daily to separate equipment within the same center and to a physically remote backup facility, the G-Drive’s structure did not allow for extern…
Obviously no person in a lawmaking position will ever have the patience or foresight to learn about this, but the fact they won't even try is all the more infuriating.
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have sympathy for those affected but this article is disingenuous. I speak Spanish and have just gone to 3 or 4 Spanish news sites, and passed their articles through to ChatGPT to translate "faithfully and literally, maintaining everything including the original tone." First it gave a "verbatim, literal English translation" and then asked me if I would like "a version that reads naturally in English (but still fait…
What isn't tested here, and what I can't test myself as a mono-linguist, is how well english is translated to other languages. I'm sure it's passable, but I absolutely expect it to be less sufficient because most of the people working on this live in the USA / speak english and work the most on that. I want to know how it holds up translating Spanish to Farsi, for example.
A classic issue is dealing with things like wordplay. Good bilingual editors might be able to get across the intended meaning in other ways, but I highly doubt translation software is capable of even recognizing it.
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#505Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? You can easily encrypt your data before sending it for storage on on S3, for example.
You and I can encrypt our data before saving it into the cloud, because we have nothing of value or interest to someone with the resources of a state. Sometimes sensitive data at the government level has a pretty long shelf life; you may want it to remain secret in 30, 50, 70 years.
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#507First, (as you guys have seen) South Korea's IT security track record is not great. Many high-profile commercial sites have been hacked. If a government site was hacked by North Korea, it won't be the first, and while it would be another source of political bickering and finger-pointing, it's likely to blow over in a month.
In fact, given that SK's president Lee started his term in June after his predecessor Yoon's disastrous attempt at overthrowing the constitution, Lee could easily frame this as a proof of the Yoon admin's incompetence.
But deliberately setting fire on a government data center? Now that's a career ending move. If that's found out, someone's going to prison for the rest of their life. Someone should be really desperate to attempt that kind of thing. But what thing could be so horrible that they would rather risk everything to burn the evidence? Merely "we got hacked by North Korea" doesn't cut it.
Which brings us to the method. A bunch of old lithium batteries, overdue for replacement, and predictably the job was sold to the lowest bidder - and the police knows the identity of everyone involved in the job and is questioning them as we speak.
So if you are the evil perpetrator, either you bribed one of the lowest wage workers to start a fire (and the guy is being questioned right now), or you just hoped one of the age-old batteries would randomly start fire. Neither sounds like a good plan.
Which brings us to the question "Why do people consider that plausible?" And that's a doozy.
Did I mention that President Yoon almost started a coup and got kicked out? Among the countless stupid things he did, he somehow got hooked up on election conspiracy theories that say that South Korea's election commission was infiltrated by Chinese spies (along with major political parties, newspapers, courts, schools, and everything) and they cooked the numbers to make the (then incumbent) People's Power Party to lose congressional election of 2024.
Of course, the theory breaks down the moment you look close. If Chinese spies had that much power, how come they let Yoon win his own election in 2022? Never mind that South Korea uses paper ballots and every ballot and every voting place is counted under the watch of representatives from multiple parties. To change numbers in one counting place, you'll have to bribe at least a dozen people. Good luck doing that at a national scale.
But somehow that doesn't deter those devoted conspiracy theorists, and now there are millions of idiots in South Korea who shout "Yoon Again" and believe our lord savior Trump will come to Korea any day soon, smite Chinese spy Lee and communist Democratic Party from their seats, and restore Yoon at his rightful place at the presidential office.
(Really, South Korea was fortunate that Yoon had the charisma of a wet sack of potatoes. If he were half as good as Trump, who knows what would have happened ...)
So, if you listen to the news from South Korea, and somehow there's a lot of noise about Chinese masterminds controlling everything in South Korea ... well now you know what's going on.
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#508Goodness, I have over 100TB at home and it cost less than a two or three thousand dollars to put in place. That's like $25 per TB. > The stored data amounts to 858TB (terabytes), equivalent to 449.5 billion A4 sheets. No, the 858TB amounts to under $25k for the government of the 10th largest economy, of one of the most sophisticated countries on the planet, to put in place. Two of those would be less than the price o…
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#509Goodness, I have over 100TB at home and it cost less than a two or three thousand dollars to put in place. That's like $25 per TB. > The stored data amounts to 858TB (terabytes), equivalent to 449.5 billion A4 sheets. No, the 858TB amounts to under $25k for the government of the 10th largest economy, of one of the most sophisticated countries on the planet, to put in place. Two of those would be less than the price o…
The most sophisticated countries and companies are smart enough to use the least sophisticated backup methods. SK needs to backup their data to cassette tapes and tape libraries cost a bit more than that, but not much. Even if they boat their tapes over to an iron mountain in the US, I can't imagine the equipment and service fees are going to cost them more than a few hundred grand. They'll be spending more on the he…
If I was being paid to manage that data set, I’d probably find two enterprise storage vendors, and stick two copies of the data set on them, each with primary secondary backup. Enterprise flash has been under a dollar a gigabyte for over a decade, so that’s under $1.7M per copy, amortized over five years. That’s $700K per year, and one of the four copies (at 3-4 sites) could be the primary store.
(I can’t be bothered to look up current prices, but moore’s law says there have been six capacity doublings since then, and it still applies to flash and networking, so divide my estimate by 2^6 — so, ten-ish grand per year, with zero full time babysitters required).
Re: Fire destroys S. Korean government's cloud storage system, no backups available
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you start to do math, hard drive are cheap when you go for capacity and not performance. 0.00099*1000 is 0.99. So about 12$ a year. Now extrapolate something like 5 year period or 10 year period. And you get to 60 to 120$ for TB. Even at 3 to 5x redundancy those numbers start to add up.
S3 does not spend 3x drives to provide redundancy. Probably 20% more drives or something like that. They split data to chunks and use erasure coding to store them in multiple drives with little overhead.
[1] https://bigdatastream.substack.com/p/how-aws-s3-scales-with-...