They do that because there are some things that you can’t put in the cloud, like HIPAA protected data. It’s absolutely a rip off, but that was their solution.
Comment on Federal Cyber Experts Thought Microsoft’s Cloud Was “a Pile of Shit.” They Approved It Anyway.
IWW4@lemmy.zip 23 hours ago
CLOUD is such a fucking rip off!! Anyone with any sense can see that.
My favorite part of Amazon’s Web Service is AWS Outposts.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
They will put the AWS cloud in your data center.
You will rent AWS servers and the rack they sit in. You will administer them, power and cool them, handle all the connectivity to the servers and you get to run all the software…
It is such a fucking rip off.
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
noahm@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
You absolutely can store HIPAA data in the cloud.
Latency is one of the big selling points for Outposts. They have customers wanting to control industrial equipment from their cloud resources, but the nearest AWS region is too far away to provide the low latency connectivity they need. With Outposts, they get the cloud, but with on-prem network latency.
angband@lemmy.world 38 minutes ago
The HIPAA Security Rule focuses on safeguarding electronic protected health information (ePHI) held or maintained by regulated entities. The ePHI that a regulated entity creates, receives, maintains, or transmits must be protected against reasonably anticipated threats, hazards, and impermissible uses and/or disclosures. This publication provides practical guidance and resources that can be used by regulated entities of all sizes to safeguard ePHI and better understand the security concepts discussed in the HIPAA Security Rule.
So at what point can a lawyer say that all the cloud breaches violate the “reasonably anticipated” rule?
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
There is no certification process in place for using a cloud to store HIPAA data. It even says that on the page that you linked. Legally, any organization that used this service would be opening themselves to further liability under HIPAA.
4am@lemmy.zip 21 hours ago
Tell that to literally every hospital, medical provider, and insurer in the United States.
They’re all using AWS, and OneDrive.
wholookshere@piefed.blahaj.zone 20 hours ago
can you site the part of HIPAA that says that?
There’s no certification for HIPAA defined in law.
ramble81@lemmy.zip 22 hours ago
I see the approach of Outposts, just don’t know if I agree with it. Part of the point is it lets you have a dedicated, isolated, on-premise platform **without ** the need to train existing engineers/admins on a secondary technology like Nutanix, ProxMox, etc.
So your calculus should include the cost to rent vs dedicated head count (and let me tell you, companies fucking hate headcount).
Now all that being said, I have yet to see a situation where it really is more cost effective, especially due to the things you mentioned.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 22 hours ago
on-premise
You mean “private cloud”, right? No one who can afford outpost will be putting this in their server closet. It’ll go in the datacenter.
ramble81@lemmy.zip 22 hours ago
“Private cloud” has always been a synonym for “on-premise”. I’ve managed Datacenter infrastructure for decades and always referred to it to on-premise before private cloud even became a term. It basically is referring to Datacenter space you own or rent vs another company’s servers and DCs.
Hell, I’ve worked in companies where they had Datacenter space in the same building as their office (and not small either, one was 32 racks, another was almost 200). So that very much was “on-premise”
4am@lemmy.zip 21 hours ago
The whole point of “cloud” was to eliminate data centers.
If there was a low latency need for a private cloud, of course you put it as close as possible.
Dojan@pawb.social 23 hours ago
I found out that Azure DevOps can be hosted in this same manner. You pay a license fee to host and maintain it yourself.
I was shocked. Lmao.
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
This is because DevOps is the updated version of Visual Studio Team Foundation Server. You have always been able to self host it because that used to be the only option.
Dojan@pawb.social 19 hours ago
I only found out because a colleague spent an entire day maintaining the server we host it on. The notion of having to pay to do all the BS operative work around using that shitty platform is so silly to me. If anything it feels like Microsoft should pay us.