19 ms·
Why we're leaving Heroku
- jsnathan 11y agoIf you're in the U.S., please do what you can to help stop this beast 'CISA'. Here is a starting point: https://act.eff.org/action/stop-the-cybersecurity-information-sharing-act https://act.eff.org/action/stop-the-cybersecurity-informatio...
- redbergy 11y agoWhy are the larger tech firms like Microsoft and Apple supporting CISA when they opposed previous incarnations of the bill like SOPA and PIPA?
- free2rhyme214 11y agoCorporate double speak.
- tzs 11y agoSOPA and PIPA are not previous incarnations of CISA. CISA has nothing to do with SOPA and PIPA.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- stevecalifornia 11y agoThis still is totally unrelated to SOPA. Also, the blog you linked to is from the same organization that wrote the article we are looking at. Here is the bill's actual text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/234/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/234/...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- lucisferre 11y ago> Salesforce joined Apple, Microsoft, and other tech giants last week in endorsing the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA). Is there a complete list of who endorsed this? Google is turning up very little.
- jsnathan 11y agoI cannot find a complete list, but it has been endorsed by the BSA trade group. You can see a list of its members on WP [1]. Besides Microsoft and Apple, it also includes Adobe, Intel, IBM, Oracle, AVG, McAfee and Symantec (and others). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSA_%28The_Software_Alliance%29#Members https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSA_%28The_Software_Alliance%2...
- jgrowl 11y agoI don't think I've heard the BSA mentioned since I was in college arguing with a teacher about how the BSA's piracy numbers were completely over inflated and made up. The teacher used those number in her argument that piracy was literally the same as stealing a car, while admitting that even she did it. It makes me depressed that major companies still support such an idiotic organization.
- hapless 11y agoWhy are we back here every year, like clockwork? This is what, the 4th incarnation of this bill?
- MCRed 11y agoBecause government wants control, and while we have to raise a lot of awareness in a short period of time to bring pressure to the politicians on this issue... those who propose this legislation just go back when "Defeated" and rewrite it, put it forward under another name etc. I believe a lot of the stuff that was "defeated" in the past, got inserted into the recent "net neutrality" ruling that had the internets cheering! (800 pages if I recall, so I didn't read it to find out for sure.) They will not stop-- law enforcement types have permanent jobs and they're there each year claiming they need more and more control/surveillance.
- protomyth 11y agoYes, but the other thing is the short period of awareness does not end with the political destruction of the sponsors of the bill. We defeat the bill but the sponsor walks away unhurt. Why are they not vilified for their anti-constitutional behavior?
- Frondo 11y agoIt isn't "government," it's a handful of politicians who've been bribed (legally, by way of campaign contributions). Want to stop this from happening, and make our elected officials more responsive to the people who elect them? Fight for campaign finance reform. That one fight will do more to "fix government" at all levels (i.e. make it responsive to the people) than just about anything else.
- rdegges 11y agoI've got quite a lot invested in Heroku, it's honestly really disappointing to see Salesforce do something like this. It's the responsibility of EVERYONE in the industry (especially larger tech companies) to take a stand against government, and help push for individual privacy.
- erikpukinskis 11y agoI disagree. I think it's great that you want to push for individual privacy, but I don't think everyone in the industry has a responsibility to push for what you want. Everyone gets to choose what they want to advocate for.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoWorking for a corporation does not relieve you of the basic human responsibility to stand against evil. The fact that many, even most, humans ignore this responsibility only makes it more important.
- erikpukinskis 11y agoEvery minute you're fighting for privacy is a minute you're not fighting the evil I choose to focus on, which trust me is a far greater evil than yours. You see how it sounds?
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoPersonally, I'm not saying everyone must spend every minute resisting evil. I'm saying everyone is responsible for not actively encouraging evil, which is what Salesforce et. al. are doing. There's a difference between failing to volunteer at a rape crisis center vs. actually raping someone.* *Obligatory internet disclaimer: This is a analogy.
- Finster 11y agoI need a browser plugin or something to let me know when I'm visiting the website of a company that has thrown in with gov't surveillance.
- raphaelss 11y agoIs there an updated list somewhere?
- jbraithwaite 11y agoIf you supply me with a list, I'll build it
- zobzu 11y agothat would be cool actually, but where would one find such a list?
- forgotmysn 11y agoI'm sure if you guys emailed the EFF with your idea, they would be happy to help put one together.
- mc32 11y agoI think the list of the ones not complicit acquiescent with some government somewhere would be shorter. On a sidenote, I think this kind of thinking has the potential to stray into a purist and idealist kind of dead-end exercise in frustration.
- MCRed 11y agoI followed the link and clicked on the letter from the BSA. I did not see any reference to the CISA in the letter. It seems to be endorsing more restrictions on government surveillance, not less. (at least, thats what the letter claims.)
- bgentry 11y agoIn the section where they are requesting immediate congressional action, they list "Cyber Threat Information Sharing Legislation". This is CISA.
- irq-1 11y agoIf the NSA can't steal the data, then companies will provide the data. Same thing they did with phone "meta" data; shift responsibility to the companies. This is the new peace. The NSA won't attack your business, and your business will become a part of the national security apparatus.
- snug 11y agoWhy would a company want to endorse this? What is the upside for them?
- alexfoo 11y agoNot being blackballed for any Government contracts?
- tptacek 11y agoOr a variety of other reasons that we can, like that reason, simply make up. The funny thing about your made-up reason? It's actually forbidden by statute in the very bill we're discussing.
- pkinsky 11y agoGee, I'm glad the US government takes so much care to follow not just the letter but the spirit of the law.
- xeromal 11y agoQuest CEO stood up to the NSA a few years ago. Got blackballed with all kinds of shit and ended up going to jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio Also agrees with the other answer that goverment contracts will be dropped.
- protomyth 11y agoLook, this "get in touch with your representative / senator" is not going to do it. Can we start mentioning the sponsors and bad amenders of these bills? Nowhere in this letter does it mention the sponsors of the bill. Yeah, the business may loose a little business, but some other damn corp or group will sponsor this bill. I know in some districts electing a member of the opposite party (and this being a cross-party issue that can be a crap shoot) is not going to happen, but we can work to primary-out the damn fool. The only way politicians are going to listen is if you take their seat away. If you make them fear you if they even think about introducing legislation then you win.
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoToo many citizens think their favorite party is better for the country than the other party. They'll never actually be objective in who they vote for.
- protomyth 11y agoGiven that, this is a non-party issue. Plenty of blue and red on the good and bad sides. You primary-out the offenders and don't worry about party. The issue matters.
- jacques_chester 11y agoThe Paasify link seems to compare Heroku and Pivotal Web Services by default. Note that the last update to that page was 2 years ago, according to the link. Disclaimer: I work for Pivotal Labs, PWS is run by another division of the same company.
- 13thLetter 11y agoUnfortunately, most people upset about this issue right now will still obediently walk into the voting booth next November and vote to re-elect public officials (or at least the next candidate from the same party) who supported this. Unless you're willing to put your vote where your mouth is and thus make it clear that actions have consequences, nothing will change.
- superuser2 11y agoWhat election outcome do you imagine is going to make this better?
- 13thLetter 11y agoAny election outcome where politicians who fail to oppose this, whether Democratic or Republican, are out of office and replaced with those of a different party, is the path to making this better. If you keep throwing the bums out -- and don't tell me that's impossible, no matter how many ads they buy they can't directly control what vote gets cast -- eventually you'll have bums in office who have a better sense of self-preservation. There's a very smart epigram along the lines of, the way to get good policy is not to elect good politicians, because such beasts hardly exist or get corrupted fast: it's to give bad politicians an incentive to act good. Let's give our bad politicians a nice strong incentive to oppose the surveillance state, hey?
- superuser2 11y agoYou seem to imagine that the public overwhelmingly opposes surveillance but politicians are simply ignoring its wishes. The public is clearly capable of voicing moral outrage: see gay marriage, abortion, and the Black Lives Matter movement. Where are the protests about surveillance? Why haven't the data-driven, opportunistic people who run campaigns identified this opportunity and seized it? Where are the people who care outside of HN and the rest of the internet libertarian community? If you could find the votes to enact such a strategy in a way that politicians would understand they were being punished for surveillance and not just subject to the irrationality of the American people like they always are, wouldn't it be much simpler to rally those people around support for a candidate that will actually dismantle the national security apparatus?
- tptacek 11y agoSo far as we know†, CISA has virtually nothing to do with PRISM. CISA enables information sharing only in the context of "cyber attacks" (a term defined reasonably precisely in the bill). Essentially, what CISA says is that companies can run intrusion detection systems (like they already do) and then share the alerts with DHS. PRISM is, as far as we can tell from the leaks, a tasking system for FISA 702 warrants. FISA 702 warrants can pertain to any foreign intelligence target. They have virtually unlimited scope (as does foreign signals intelligence as a whole). I think this is a distinction with a big difference, but leaving that difference aside: the mention of PRISM is clearly an emotional appeal, and sets the tone for the rest of the open letter. CISA is also at pains to avoid the sharing of PII (again: since CISPA, and the Rockefeller bill before that, these bills have been intended essentially for IDS alert sharing). It also does not shield companies from liability for sharing information via FISA 702 requests: the only liability protection CISA sharers get is for information shared to prevent cyberattacks. † Given the little we know about PRISM, that is.
- belorn 11y agoIf the shared information is only for IDS alert sharing where any irrelevant information to cyber security is removed, then why do they need immunity from privacy and antitrust laws? Surely companies in the US can today report to the police if someone gain illegal access to servers, do a DDOS, or sends fishing/malware to them. If the police then involve the FBI with the case while requesting relevant customer information, what laws would the company break from complying?
- skissane 11y agoSurely the company can just go to the FBI/DHS/etc directly if they wish? IANAL, but if a company has information which it reasonably believes to be evidence of a crime, what court would find it illegal for them to volunteer it to the federal government?
- tptacek 11y agoNo, they in the general case cannot.
- kkamperschroer 11y agoCenturyLink Cloud AppFog is a good alternative. I know, I know, it's CenturyLink and that's concerning to you. Cloud is like a different company entirely. Disclaimer: I helped build AppFog as a contractor.
- Zaheer 11y agoAnyone have experience with Heroku alternatives like Openshift Origin?
- bdcravens 11y agoCloud66 is a pretty close match to Heroku.
- kasia66 11y agoCloud 66 provides full stack container management as a service in production, that offers Heroku-like functionality on any cloud provider or on your own server, http://www.cloud66.com/ http://www.cloud66.com/ (Disclaimer: I work at Cloud 66)
- rip747 11y agoIs it standard nowadays to charge customers for support? Checking out the pricing (and correct me if I'm wrong), does it really cost $5000/month to have 24/7 support? That seems crazy to me. Now granted I pay about $300/month for the VM I have with my hosting provider, but I can pick up a phone at any hour and talk to a tech when things go south. I really don't care how good a service is, I want to talk with a breathing human being when my business is down.
- joshmn 11y ago> $300/month for the VM High-availability, automatic failover, managed, with diamond-cut SSDs I hope? Who are you with? For that money you should just pick up a box.
- bdcravens 11y agoWhen a typical developer or admin cost is $50 or so an hour, $300 isn't a material amount, and there are use cases where it's not just about whether a single VM less or more than the cost of a single physical server.
- dmichulke 11y agoFrom a company point of view, supporting CISA might well make sense in order to avoid the legal problems they are bound to have due to being coerced to cooperate with the government. From a consumer point of view, it also makes sense to avoid "officially tapped" (read "US") services. In the long run, it looks to me that gov't is laying the foundation of the demise of its own surveillance program because no one in his right mind would want his data in the US anymore, even less so if you're not an American company. Except for the German government, of course.
- greatthanks 11y ago> Except for the German government, of course. What do you mean?
- dmichulke 11y agoThey don't care whether Germans' phone calls are tapped, the chancellor's phone is tapped or German companies are subject to industrial espionage. Each of the above provably happened and the responses were (in descending order of their "strength"): - the chancellor cancelling the phone contract with Verizon - asking the US for an apology (didn't happen) - asking the US to sign a no-spy treaty (which would be purely trust-based - no control possible and still the US refuses to sign it) -- end of list -- Note the absence of lawsuits, demissions / resignations and "diplomatic tensions".
- glitchdout 11y agoDon't forget - Not caring that its intelligence agencies are selling their own citizens metadata (and content) http://www.zeit.de/digital/datenschutz/2015-08/xkeyscore-nsa-domestic-intelligence-agency http://www.zeit.de/digital/datenschutz/2015-08/xkeyscore-nsa... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/08/germany-hands-over-citizens-metadata-in-return-for-nsas-top-spy-software/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/08/germany-hands-ove... This has not been proven (yet).
- SteveLAnderson 11y agohttp://www.salesforce.com/company/news-press/press-releases/2015/09/150925.jsp http://www.salesforce.com/company/news-press/press-releases/... “At Salesforce, trust is our number one value and nothing is more important to our company than the privacy of our customers' data,” said Burke Norton, chief legal officer, Salesforce. “Contrary to reports, Salesforce does not support CISA and has never supported CISA.”