If a DA/US Attorney can indict a ham sandwich, getting a search warrant isn't that big a deal.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Jon Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > I am trying to point out that not all governments will play totally by the > rules. A search warrant, at least in the states, requires some proof of > wrong doing along with a judges blessing. The warrant I am referring to is > just a government letter saying we want access, and would potentially > specify that the cloud vendor not tell their client that this is happening > the agency does not even have to get a judges blessing on the search. I > believe there have been a number of instances where this has happened > already but I can't site any specifically. On premise data would at least > be safer from that kind of thing happening. It is harder to have > government agents walk up to a door of a company and tell them 'hey we > demand access to all of your servers so that we can snoop around and > see what you are doing' and not have a bunch of lawyers demanding to see > the proof of wrong doing. A cloud vendor would not be in a position until > all the legal challenges are done to tell those same government agents 'no' > without incurring some liability. Once all the legal challenges are done > and the cloud vendors have all the legal contracts in place and some sort > of protection from the potential criminal liability then the cloud would > be to some degree safer for companies to move to it. I am not condemning > it's use just handing out an opinion as to this movement with less than > critical thinking by SMB's. > > Jon > > ------------------------------ > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: Microsoft's 'Blue' servers > Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 00:41:35 +0000 > > > I hate to say it but I see a lot of companies regretting the decision to > jump to the web when some gov decides it can just issue a warrant and start > searching that businesses digital material. > > > > > > What does “jumping to the web” have to do with cloud? If the authorities > can get a warrant, they can just turn up at your door and seize your paper > files if you insist on not having anything digital. > > > > Perhaps I’m a bit confused as to whether you’re condemning (1) the use of > digital media, (2) putting things onto the WWW, or (3) using a cloud > provider. If it’s either (1) or (2) I think you’d have a hard time > convincing anyone that the risks and costs outweigh the benefits. > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jon Harris > *Sent:* Wednesday, 5 June 2013 10:17 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [NTSysADM] RE: Microsoft's 'Blue' servers > > > > I hate to say it but I see a lot of companies regretting the decision to > jump to the web when some gov decides it can just issue a warrant and start > searching that businesses digital material. The IRS has been doing it with > emails claiming they have the right to do it. It may not be the American > gov that does this first (but I would not bet against it) and it will > cost some company big time. > > I seem to also remember someone on the list a few months ago posting an > article about a hack that allowed for cloud machines to be compromised if > where were on the same hypervisor. > > Jon > > ------------------------------ > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: Microsoft's 'Blue' servers > Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 00:05:46 +0000 > > It won’t happen overnight. But my prediction is that eventually the > providers will, after grabbing the non-complex mass market, start going > after industry verticals. They’ll start with the low-hanging fruit (i.e. > smaller firms that exist in just one jurisdiction). They’ll get a bunch of > lawyers, talk to regulators and so on, and start marketing a ‘certified’ > solution for that industry – possibly with some level of indemnification. > > > > It’s definitely customers who are pushing the “cloud” thing – even in some > large FSI corps that I’ve colleagues in are pushing this. They’re turning > to their current outsourcers and asking “why can’t I get the same > flexibility/pricing/etc from you that I can get from Amazon?” “Why does it > take you 6 weeks to give me a server whereas Amazon can give me one in 2 > hours?” and so on. It’s going to be a huge issue for HP/CSC/IBM, which is > why they’re scrambling to put together their own cloud offerings. VMWare’s > also sniffing around – touting their services business as a replacement for > incumbent outsourcers. > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *James Rankin > *Sent:* Wednesday, 5 June 2013 1:07 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [NTSysADM] RE: Microsoft's 'Blue' servers > > > > Hmmm, sounds like MS' approach is that they've decided that The Cloud is > unavoidable, or will at least represent the "sensible choice" in future > > > > For dev and test environments, sure, and maybe smaller enterprises without > regulatory requirements and/or no budget to spare for private > infrastructure, but throw in any kind of data security and integrity - > particularly anything that has implications related to storing information > in other global jurisdictions - and I just get the feeling that it won't > take off as much as everyone would have us believe. > > > > I'm also becoming less convinced of Microsoft's capability to respond to > customer requirements, although to be honest that's exhibiting more in the > consumer end at the moment than business. > > > > I'm not known as any kind of trend-predictor or tech commentator, though, > so I'm just stating my gut feelings :-) > > > > > On 4 June 2013 15:52, <[email protected]> wrote: > > They will never position it as something you HAVE to do or else (like > Google). They are developing the technology so that when you’re ready, it > will be ready for your needs. The Cloud leader will be the one that can > show “why” it makes sense to move, not that moving is the only choice. > > > > Sent from Microsoft Surface Pro > > > > *From:* James Rankin > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 4, 2013 9:33 AM > *To:* [email protected] > > > > But the expectation is that "years later" everyone will go cloud-based of > some sort? > > > > I can see that not flying for a lot of orgs - if MS take the "shove it > down your throat regardless" option they did with some of the Win8 > features, it might change the landscape somewhat > > > > Just my ill-informed and quickly-formulated opinion :-) > > > > On 4 June 2013 15:27, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > Microsoft wants to drive you to the cloud. > > > > Some people will settle on a single version of the software and then move > years later. There is no ostensible requirement to keep pace with Microsoft. > >
