undefined | Better HN

0 pointssneak2y ago0 comments

You can indeed make laws to hold the companies responsible, but that's not going to change the situation where it's dumb to store private information on systems that aren't under your control.

You might be able to cause consequences after the fact, but your data will still get leaked first. You can't undo a privacy violation with tort law, and there won't ever be criminal penalties.

If you want your information to stay private, don't store it on other people's computers. IDGAF what "the default today" is. (Also, that's wrong - everyone that is serious and actually wants their data to remain private doesn't store it in the cloud. This is why the CIA got Amazon to build a custom airgapped on-prem AWS region at Langley, for instance.)

0 comments

LeafItAlone2y ago

A main draw of these “security” cameras is to be able to remotely monitor the locations where they are, including being able to events in the event the devices are stolen. Should I build my own off site, redundant, data centers to make this possible without using a cloud service?

> Also, that's wrong - everyone that is serious and actually wants their data to remain private doesn't store it in the cloud. This is why the CIA got Amazon to build a custom airgapped on-prem AWS region at Langley, for instance.)

Do you think that “everyone that is serious and actually wants their data to remain private” is the default? In a random sampling of 100 people, how many do you think fall into this category?

> This is why the CIA got Amazon to build a custom airgapped on-prem AWS region at Langley, for instance.

Is your threat model the same as Langley’s? Or might there just be different levels of what people’s needs are?

There’s ideals and there’s practicality. It’s impractical in today’s world to completely avoid cloud services. If you can do it, congratulations, more power to you.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse