3 ms·

> S3 is one of the absolute best choices because it's cheap and requires you to manage no infrastructure at all ... and there is no possibility of ever having

> S3 is one of the absolute best choices because it's cheap and requires you to manage no infrastructure at all ... and there is no possibility of ever having proper TLS, with or without CloudFlare. That alone disqualifies it as "best". It simply doesn't meet minimum requirements. > Again this has the prerequisite of maintaining infrastructure which needs to be kept up to date and secure. It's also massively more expensive than S3 for my use case. What are you paying for S3, currently?

K0nserv 10y ago
> ... and there is no possibility of ever having proper TLS, with or without CloudFlare. That alone disqualifies it as "best". It simply doesn't meet minimum requirements. I'd argue that using CloudFront for SSL termination would be slightly better, but ultimately even just running an EC2 instance implies trusting Amazon and giving them power to intercept and mess with your traffic. So I guess with CloudFlare the only difference is you are trusting one more entity that could screw you over. So you end up trusting both Amazon and CloudFlare. > What are you paying for S3, currently? I pay roughly $0.03/month so switching to something like a DO droplet($5/month) would increase cost by 16566%, increase labour required and make the site less stable and more vulnerable to hug of death scenarios.