• deegeese
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    “By design” AWS bills project owners for unauthorized calls to the public S3 API.

    So what I’m reading from this is you can do a billing attack on anything hosted in AWS so long as you know one of their bucket names.

    • bambooEnglish
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Seriously, now that this is more widely known, it’ll for sure be taken advantage of a lot, to the point AWS will begrudgingly protect their customers once the damage is done.

  • wpuckering
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    6 months ago
    edit-2
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    You shouldn’t be charged for unauthorized requests to your buckets. Currently if you know any person’s bucket name, which is easily discoverable if you know what you’re doing, that means you can maliciously rack up their bill just to hurt them financially by spamming it with anonymous requests.

      • gravitas_deficiencyEnglish
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        lol dude, I’ve known several people who have worked at AWS for years, and the amount of duct tape and bailing wire Mickey Mouse shit that I’ve heard goes on there just does not inspire confidence.

        • Sicklad
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Yeah in my last role we were probably the biggest user of a certain storage service that was still kinda new, there were quite a few times we found bugs, features that straight up didn’t work how the documentation stated, and aws sent us workaround scripts that seriously looked like an unpaid intern wrote.

          I’m not sure if GCP/Azure would be much different though.

  • AmbiguousPropsEnglish
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    As it turns out, one of the popular open-source tools had a default configuration to store their backups in S3. And, as a placeholder for a bucket name, they used the same name that I used for my bucket.

    • LostXOR
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      It’s completely insane that the tool would attempt to connect to a nonexistent bucket for backups by default instead of just having them disabled completely?

  • sensiblepuffin
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    AWS was kind enough to cancel my S3 bill. However, they emphasized that this was done as an exception.

    Dicks.

    • atzanteolEnglish
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      65
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      It’s fine if you dislike a site. But the correct thing to do is not consume their content, not to work around it.

      • borari
        arrow-up
        40
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Medium is the journalistic version of the gig economy apps, mixed with a bit of digital landlording. The correct thing to do here is to bypass any of Mediums paywalls you might run in to.

        • neo (he/him)English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          This wasn’t even paywalled, I just don’t like Medium.

          • borari
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            I abhor medium, but run across it a little while researching cybersecurity shit. I had no idea scribe.rip existed, so thanks for the plug.

      • kevincox
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        edit-2
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Or use a browser extension to implement your preferences rather than push them onto others in a way that makes it harder for them to implement theirs.

        If an article links to medium.com my redirects kick in, my link flagging kicks in and everything else. If everyone uses some different service to “fix” medium I am stuck with what they like. There is valuable to keeping the canonical URL.

        I would also love to see domain blocks as a user preference in Lemmy. Just hide these sites that I don’t like.

  • Deebster
    cake
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    A great post, interesting and to the point.

    • onlinepersonaEnglish
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      I woke up yesterday morning and felt a little bit hazy. My feet tingled a little and that was an indication of what was going to happen. My podometric senses were tingling! Hahaha, get it? So anyway, after having a light breakfast and sitting down in front of my desk to check my emails, one in particular stood out. Being in a hurry however, I left for work and

      Article written like this are reason for me to stop reading. So annoying. This article is a breath of fresh air.

      Anti Commercial-AI license

    • 30p87
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Chilling with nothing but my homeserver here. Backed up to the NAS, mirrored to my grandparents house. No charges, no misconfigurations, just Arch testing being more stable than any commercial service I know lol