4 ms·

This is hilarious. All this complicated and unneeded stuff for a static website. It completely misses not just a point but multiple points. Maybe you want a st

This is hilarious. All this complicated and unneeded stuff for a static website. It completely misses not just a point but multiple points. Maybe you want a static sites so that it'll 'live' forever and not be effected by future changes in software stacks. You definitely don't get that by doing this. Maybe you want a static site so that it's simple to set up. It's not this. Maybe you want a static site for security, all the complexity and accounts here make it less secure than a random site running random php. This is just buzzword bingo for someone's resume.

unethical_ban 7y ago
>Maybe you want a static site for security, all the complexity and accounts here make it less secure than a random site running random php. You seem to have no idea what you're talking about. Are you claiming that a static site with Cloudfront and S3 is less secure than an arbitrary PHP website? There are clearly tradeoffs. Running your own server on your own hardware in a colo or at home is the best option if you need it to run for 30+ years and don't want to worry about "software stacks". Good job, now you have to worry about hardware stacks and backups. This solution has an instant, global CDN that mitigates low level DOS and provides better response time across the planet. But that doesn't seem important to you.
mslate 7y ago
No need to be cynical. Content can be both helpful information and buzzword bingo.
joeyspn 7y ago
Hmm you conveniently omitted comments about HA, latency or scalability... Pushing a bundle of files to a CDN it's undeniably a superior static site/SPA hosting in many ways. Maybe the article overcomplicates but with services like Netlify, Amplify or Firebase Hosting it's stupid easy and cheap, and there's no vendor lock-in.
jorblumesea 7y ago
Yeah, because no one can DDOS your CDN or hosting box /s
johncolanduoni 7y ago
What changing software stacks? The S3 and CloudFront configuration options used here haven’t changed for years. I can’t think of an AWS deprecation that has ever happened that would be on the level of breaking this very common configuration. There’s only one account here (an AWS one), and since the content is public anyway there also isn’t much in the way of configuration subtleties. If you have a way to compromise a static S3/CloudFront site more easily than you would a Wordpress instance that hasn’t been updated in 6 months, I’d love to read that blog post. Buzzword bingo has unfortunately become a buzzword itself it seems.

unethical_ban 7y ago

>Maybe you want a static site for security, all the complexity and accounts here make it less secure than a random site running random php. You seem to have no idea what you're talking about. Are you claiming that a static site with Cloudfront and S3 is less secure than an arbitrary PHP website? There are clearly tradeoffs. Running your own server on your own hardware in a colo or at home is the best option if you need it to run for 30+ years and don't want to worry about "software stacks". Good job, now you have to worry about hardware stacks and backups. This solution has an instant, global CDN that mitigates low level DOS and provides better response time across the planet. But that doesn't seem important to you.

mslate 7y ago

No need to be cynical. Content can be both helpful information and buzzword bingo.

joeyspn 7y ago

Hmm you conveniently omitted comments about HA, latency or scalability... Pushing a bundle of files to a CDN it's undeniably a superior static site/SPA hosting in many ways. Maybe the article overcomplicates but with services like Netlify, Amplify or Firebase Hosting it's stupid easy and cheap, and there's no vendor lock-in.

jorblumesea 7y ago

Yeah, because no one can DDOS your CDN or hosting box /s

johncolanduoni 7y ago

What changing software stacks? The S3 and CloudFront configuration options used here haven’t changed for years. I can’t think of an AWS deprecation that has ever happened that would be on the level of breaking this very common configuration. There’s only one account here (an AWS one), and since the content is public anyway there also isn’t much in the way of configuration subtleties. If you have a way to compromise a static S3/CloudFront site more easily than you would a Wordpress instance that hasn’t been updated in 6 months, I’d love to read that blog post. Buzzword bingo has unfortunately become a buzzword itself it seems.