Re:FBI seizes riseup.net server
by samstave on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:43PM
(#3865568)
This is a testament to why you would want to use AWS virtual instances and never have "a server" - point your domain at a new instance should one machine get ordered off by the FBI.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Good idea. "The cloud" worked real wonders for Wikileaks.
Re:FBI seizes riseup.net server
by carguy1983 on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:51PM
(#3865607)
Wow, you place an awful lot of faith in amazon.
Not really actually, I just mean having a discrete server that can be "seized" is not a particularly robust solution.
Re:FBI seizes riseup.net server
by carguy1983 on Thursday April 19, 2012 @08:33PM
(#3865932)
... and what do you think an Amazon slice is? It sits on a physical machine that can be identified, located, and handed over by Amazon given a lawful request, all without the site operators knowing.
You think they give a fuck about the other 4 slices on your server? No. They don't. In fact it says so right in their SLA.
I used the word ROBUST
If you are trying to defy the FBI, and 100% of your site architecture resides within Amazon's infrastructure you are not robust.
Flouting law enforcement does not strike me as a good design goal. If the law wants you to stop doing something, they will make sure you stop.
Law enforcement, failed hard drive, link outage, whatever...
They are all the same == Downtime.
My point is that if you have a "server" that can be seized, you have not designed a robust system.
Imagine the FBI trying to seize Google or Amazon or Facebook (well, a lot easier in the case of facebook only because they have so few datacenters by comparison.)