If you needed any more evidence that memory safety is the future...

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 09:51:44PM +0000, jmh530 via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 March 2017 at 20:59:44 UTC, ketmar wrote:
> > H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > 
> > > Yet another nail in the coffin:
> > > 
> > > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/01/aws_s3_outage/
> > 
> > i just can't stop laughing.
> 
> Seems like it was a fat finger error
> 
> http://www.geekwire.com/2017/amazon-explains-massive-aws-outage-says-employee-error-took-servers-offline-promises-changes/

Yes, which inevitably happens every now and then, because of human
fallability.

But again, the elephant in the room is that in the good ole
clear-weather days, such an error would at most take out one or two (or
a small handful) of related sites; whereas in today's cloudy situation a
single error in umbrella services like AWS can mean the outage of
thousands or maybe even millions of otherwise-unrelated sites.

And thanks to the frightening notion of the Internet of Things, one day
all it will take is a single failure and society would stop functioning
altogether.

(Even more frightening than catastrophic failure is when a security
vulnerability is replicated across redundant umbrella systems, thereby
effectively making the surface of attack universally wide -- and then
there's no telling what kind of disastrous consequences will ensue.
Cloudbleed is only the tip of the iceberg.)


T

-- 
Let X be the set not defined by this sentence...