this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
334 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

82745 readers
3076 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
334
Federal Cyber Experts Thought Microsoft’s Cloud Was “a Pile of Shit.” They Approved It Anyway. (www.propublica.org)
submitted 8 hours ago by Beep@lemmus.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • “Cloud First”: To move federal agencies to the cloud, the government created a program known as FedRAMP, whose job was to ensure the security of new technology.
  • Security Breakdown: ProPublica found that FedRAMP authorized a Microsoft product called GCC High to handle sensitive government data, despite years of concerns about its security.
  • Potential Conflict of Interest: The government relies, in part, on third-party firms to vet cloud technology, but those firms are hired and paid by the company being assessed.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

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 -1 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

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 4 points 5 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 2 points 5 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.