4 ms·
From what I understand, they’re not saying you’re not allowed to use 100% for (what their user agreements define as) legitimate uses. They’re saying several dro
by robteix 7y ago
From what I understand, they’re not saying you’re not allowed to use 100% for (what their user agreements define as) legitimate uses. They’re saying several droplets suddenly created and immediately going to 100% flags them as suspicious activity for human review. Looks like after such review, they would flag them as legitimate and all would be fine, 100% CPU or not.
They’ve botched that second step though.
- numpad0 7y agoNot sure what the materialization of that suspicion might look like -- competitors trying to crush DO's business? mass account creation or mass fraudulent logins? "mining crypto"? What I could come up felt quote-unquote legit grounds for a timed suspension but only instinctively so.
- mkl 7y agoThat doesn't make sense to me. You pay for the time you have the droplets running, so it seems kind of silly to have them sit idle for a bit before you give them work to do.
- wgerard 7y agoI don't work at a cloud provider, but I think the reasoning is: It's a common pattern in malicious actors to immediately spin up several droplets and immediately peg the CPU on each one. There are, obviously, non-malicious actors who do the same, but it's a bit like wearing a balaclava in public: Likely to raise some suspicion just because it's associated with malicious actors.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]