- “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.
This isn’t surprising to me in the slightest. I’ve been part of a small team tasked with assessing products and services for larger enterprises before and they’d almost always look over our findings nod a bunch and then go with the company whose rep took them out to a fancy dinner or gave them kickbacks.
The conflict of interest angle here is wild. You’re asking a vendor’s hired consultants to judge the vendor’s own security. That’s not a bug in FedRAMP, it’s the entire architecture.
The deeper pattern: technical experts say “pile of shit,” but the decision-makers have different incentives (cost, speed, ease of adoption). Experts get overruled, not because they’re wrong, but because they don’t control the incentive structure.
This happens everywhere. Product safety engineers flagging risks, security researchers warning about zero-days, civil engineers saying infrastructure’s past useful life. The signals exist. The system just doesn’t care.
CLOUD is such a fucking rip off!! Anyone with any sense can see that.
My favorite part of Amazon’s Web Service is AWS Outposts.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
They will put the AWS cloud in your data center.
You will rent AWS servers and the rack they sit in. You will administer them, power and cool them, handle all the connectivity to the servers and you get to run all the software…
It is such a fucking rip off.
I found out that Azure DevOps can be hosted in this same manner. You pay a license fee to host and maintain it yourself.
I was shocked. Lmao.
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.
CLOUD is such a fucking rip off!! Anyone with any sense can see that.
My favorite part of Amazon’s Web Service is AWS Outposts.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
They will put the AWS cloud in your data center.
You will rent AWS servers and the rack they sit in. You will administer them, power and cool them, handle all the connectivity to the servers and you get to run all the software…
It is such a fucking rip off.
The conflict of interest angle here is wild. You’re asking a vendor’s hired consultants to judge the vendor’s own security. That’s not a bug in FedRAMP, it’s the entire architecture.
The deeper pattern: technical experts say “pile of shit,” but the decision-makers have different incentives (cost, speed, ease of adoption). Experts get overruled, not because they’re wrong, but because they don’t control the incentive structure.
This happens everywhere. Product safety engineers flagging risks, security researchers warning about zero-days, civil engineers saying infrastructure’s past useful life. The signals exist. The system just doesn’t care.
For even more fun, look into the FAA’s “regulation” of Boeing, which was effectively “do you super duper pinky promise that you followed the rules?”
Seriously, the verification was done by Boeing and then reported back to the FAA
Crony capitalism at its finest.
The conflict of interest angle here is wild. You’re asking a vendor’s hired consultants to judge the vendor’s own security. That’s not a bug in FedRAMP, it’s the entire architecture.
The deeper pattern: technical experts say “pile of shit,” but the decision-makers have different incentives (cost, speed, ease of adoption). Experts get overruled, not because they’re wrong, but because they don’t control the incentive structure.
This happens everywhere. Product safety engineers flagging risks, security researchers warning about zero-days, civil engineers saying infrastructure’s past useful life. The signals exist. The system just doesn’t care.
Hi, I’m an AI engineer based in Japan, and I’m expanding into the U.S. market to work with more long-term clients. I’m looking for an American or European collaborator who can act as a communication bridge between me and U.S. clients.
I will handle the technical side myself, including project planning, AI development, and software implementation. Your role would be to join meetings, help with smooth communication, and support the client relationship side.
If this sounds like a good fit, please send me a message.
