Re:Fuck the Cloud (2009)
by jacquesm on Monday December 21, 2015 @01:01PM
(#10772358)
That was Jason's use case that he had in mind, but for plenty of people the situation is the exact opposite but the principle remains.
Having two cloud providers would work assuming they don't share any critical infra-structure and assuming that it is not the same set of employees that have access to both systems. Also helps if you have a totally separate set of credentials for the back-up system and if that back-up system can only be unlocked by very senior people (preferably execs) after a catastrophe of suitable magnitude hits.
Whether you store your primary in the cloud or your back-up in the cloud the story is the same: have a copy somewhere else.
Finally: the only real back-up is one that is off-line. So from that (ok, ultra-paranoid) viewpoint it would be best if you actually went to an off-line medium to store your data in such a way that nobody can wipe it all out without physically destroying all copies.
All this of course after suitably weighing the importance of the data.
Having two cloud providers would work assuming they don't share any critical infra-structure and assuming that it is not the same set of employees that have access to both systems. Also helps if you have a totally separate set of credentials for the back-up system and if that back-up system can only be unlocked by very senior people (preferably execs) after a catastrophe of suitable magnitude hits.
Whether you store your primary in the cloud or your back-up in the cloud the story is the same: have a copy somewhere else.
Finally: the only real back-up is one that is off-line. So from that (ok, ultra-paranoid) viewpoint it would be best if you actually went to an off-line medium to store your data in such a way that nobody can wipe it all out without physically destroying all copies.
All this of course after suitably weighing the importance of the data.