4 ms·

OK, serious question to you as a security guru: Shouldn't we always assume that every host outside of our control is compromised? So why should I care how lon

• tptacek 17y ago
  Yes, you should assume everything is compromised. No, that doesn't mean hosting providers can ignore breakins on their own hardware. Seriously, dude: breaks aren't like unfortunate Internet weather incidents. They're crimes. An actual crime took place using Rackspace computers. How do we even know what kind of forensics could have been conducted if Slicehost can't even acknowledge when their machines are compromised? Hosting providers have special responsibilities.
  • justinsb 17y ago
    OK, point taken. But you're assuming that Slicehost ignored the issue, rather than being bound by their own process. I simply expected more from you: as dfranke said, this is your opportunity to hammer home the importance of good security practice, and instead you're talking about something basically beyond our control (Slicehost's incident response policy) rather than the root cause (a large number of fairly basic security mistakes)
    • tptacek 17y ago
      The fact that you are startled that I'd even be talking about Slicehost's response tells me that not enough attention is being paid to this.
      • justinsb 17y ago
        OK - so there's another lesson I have to learn from you :-) Please, publish a blog post series on each of the mistakes made, explaining each one and how not to fall into the trap. Explain why slicehost taking 48 hours to notify a customer before shutting down their machine is a big problem if it belongs in the list. I'll upvote every post once it hits HN.