I actually disagree, and think that the post mortem clearly defines that there were things that were disappointing that happened with the vendor, _as well as_ things that were disappointing that happened internally. I don't think that it's unfair to point out everything in an event that happened; I do think it would be unfair to ignore all the compounding issues that were in the power of the vendor, and just swallow all of the blame for an event, when a huge reason that businesses even go through vendors at all is to have an entity responsible for a certain set of responsibilities that the business in question doesn't feel they have the expertise to do themselves. Which implies a relationship built on trust, and it's fair to call out when trust is lost.

And even though Cloudflare did put some of the blame, as it were, on the vendor, the post mortem recognizes that Cloudflare wasn't doing their due diligence on their vendor's maintenance and upkeep to verify that the state of the vendor's equipment is the same as the day they signed on.

Furthermore, we do not know that Cloudflare didn't get the vendor's blessing to submit that diagram to their post mortem. You're assuming they didn't. But for what it's worth as someone that has worked in datacenters, none of this is all that proprietary. Their business isn't hurt because this came out. This is a fairly standard (and frankly simplified for business folk) diagram of what any decently engineered datacenter building would operate like. There's no magic sauce in here that other datacenter companies are going to steal to put Flexential out of business.