News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Detailed Financial Histories Exposed for Thousands by joshmn on Saturday December 02, 2017 @03:03PM (#15833736)
Absolutely.

Windows tells you that using a password is probably a good idea for a user account. Many websites these days force you to use a combination of letters/numbers/special characters.

Why doesn't Amazon say "hey, this is publicly available, you wanna fix it?"

Re:Detailed Financial Histories Exposed for Thousands by inopinatus on Saturday December 02, 2017 @03:18PM (#15833823)
> Why doesn't Amazon say "hey, this is publicly available, you wanna fix it?"

They do. It's clearly warned about in the interface both at the time you make it so and with a big "PUBLIC" sticker label afterwards. What's more, I've received warning emails from AWS notifying of (intentionally) public buckets.

Public buckets for private data are a deliberate and wilful choice by lazy, reckless administrators.

Re:Detailed Financial Histories Exposed for Thousands by ghaff on Saturday December 02, 2017 @03:23PM (#15833851)
I noticed this when I went into my console the other day. (Ironically, to set up a public bucket for something.) I don't think the UI was bad before but, now, you'd have to be pretty clueless to have a bucket public by accident.
Re:Detailed Financial Histories Exposed for Thousands by ghaff on Saturday December 02, 2017 @03:20PM (#15833836)
You've always had to make it public deliberately. The new console UI makes setting a bucket to public a very deliberate effort.