Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading

Re:Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading by jbverschoor on Monday January 16, 2023 @02:34PM (#34404577)

Well it’s kind of insane that it has been open by default, resulting in SOOOO many leaks.

They might as well have open SSH access on all EC2 instances using root + “password”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading by beaviskhan on Monday January 16, 2023 @03:14PM (#34404966)

That's not entirely fair - the default has been to ALLOW people to set buckets to public and/or to set public ACLs on individual objects. Both of these require the customer to Do Something in order to grant public access. The default has NOT been "public access for all" ever, that I am aware of.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading by fdr on Monday January 16, 2023 @03:46PM (#34405268)

This definitely dates back to when offloading images and other static assets to S3 from your (era-appropriate) Apache or Varnish server was an optimization of the day...now, obsolete, as, at the time, there were not low-friction, lower-cost CDNs available, such as Cloudfront or Cloudflare.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading by sofixa on Tuesday January 17, 2023 @04:51AM (#34410771)

Cloudfront as the CDN, backed with S3 for your static assets is still a very common pattern on AWS.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Amazon S3 server side encryption (SSE-S3) is misleading by fdr on Wednesday January 25, 2023 @12:20AM (#34514706)

It is, but my point is referring to the time when there was no cloudfront.

[ Parent | on HN ]