7 ms·

It’s so odd. 15-20 years ago we didn’t have this problem. It just takes time and time is very precious. It comes downs to risk and time. Is the risk of this hap

It’s so odd. 15-20 years ago we didn’t have this problem. It just takes time and time is very precious. It comes downs to risk and time. Is the risk of this happening worth your time? Some times I think we embrace technology too quickly as technologists without considering the whole picture. At this point you have to ask if you can trust the people behind a technology to dk the right thing for a decade or more. If the answer is no start figuring out how to ditch it. This ignores the philosophical issues emerging with FAANG type companies. Anyhow, it’s much easier to never embrace a technology or vendor than it is to ditch it later.

philderbeast 5y ago
15-20 years ago you could get away with more mistakes without them biting you, but they where none the less mistakes that where bad. These days the bad actors have automated there exploit attempts to the point that its not even really about asking when you will get hit rather then if you will get hit anymore, its almost instant in most cases. with so little leeway its just not viable to self host anything that is exposed to the internet, and then if you still have to deal with things like off-site backups if you care at all about your data.
- bitexploder 5y ago
  I have thought about this a lot. I think it basically comes down to your domain. It’s okay to let someone else host things for you. To retain control you just have to keep your domain you are using for important things secure.
KennyBlanken 5y ago
That risk includes getting shut down by your ISP, who may be the only ISP in the area. I once got a nasty call from Comcast's net abuse department because I was gasp running a mail server. It was locked down tight, and only accepting mail from an old email provider. They didn't care. I was told that if I had SMTP open or they saw SMTP traffic coming in, I'd be permanently banned from being a Comcast customer because I was "running a server." Internet needs to be declared a utility and internet companies need to concern themselves only with reliably delivery of network packets and to otherwise completely fuck off. My power company, gas company, and water company don't give a fuck what I do with my electricity, gas, or water.

philderbeast 5y ago

15-20 years ago you could get away with more mistakes without them biting you, but they where none the less mistakes that where bad. These days the bad actors have automated there exploit attempts to the point that its not even really about asking when you will get hit rather then if you will get hit anymore, its almost instant in most cases. with so little leeway its just not viable to self host anything that is exposed to the internet, and then if you still have to deal with things like off-site backups if you care at all about your data.

bitexploder 5y ago
I have thought about this a lot. I think it basically comes down to your domain. It’s okay to let someone else host things for you. To retain control you just have to keep your domain you are using for important things secure.

KennyBlanken 5y ago

That risk includes getting shut down by your ISP, who may be the only ISP in the area. I once got a nasty call from Comcast's net abuse department because I was gasp running a mail server. It was locked down tight, and only accepting mail from an old email provider. They didn't care. I was told that if I had SMTP open or they saw SMTP traffic coming in, I'd be permanently banned from being a Comcast customer because I was "running a server." Internet needs to be declared a utility and internet companies need to concern themselves only with reliably delivery of network packets and to otherwise completely fuck off. My power company, gas company, and water company don't give a fuck what I do with my electricity, gas, or water.