Hacker News Reader

Comment by HL33tibCe7 | Hacker News Reader

This seems like a fairly glaring oversight that really shouldn’t have happened.

Between this and https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2021/09/15/omigod-how-to-au..., I’m starting to lose faith in the security of Azure.

View on HN

I'm worried Azure is getting too large to handle. It's like outlook, where 3 clicks and lead you into the old UI from the 90s. Microsoft seems addicted to breadth of features instead of quality of implementation.

sorry how do you mean with outlook? is there really a way to remove the "modern" design and unveil the 90s beauty beneath?

Not the OC, so not sure exactly what they meant, but if you go into File/Options it would recognizable to anyone from 20 years ago. But I would say the same thing about the equiv. screen in Photoshop. There's continuity in applications that have been around for decades, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The number one screen where you're exposed to it is in the filter configuration screen.

Sadly, there is nothing resembling beauty in that screen. It's a multi-page wizard that attempts to guide you through what should be a simple filter commandline to a frustrating exercise in in trying to convince the tool that yes, I do want to filter on an email address that is not in my address book.

It's from the era when the Internet just started becoming popular, and having hyperlinks instead of buttons was being introduced for no good reason at all.

AWS is pretty huge too - thw list ofnaervices doesnt fit on my screen!and half of them are half baked!

Just like all other cloud vendors, unless we are speaking about mini cloud offerings.

Where I work recently disclosed another vulnerability in a similar vein.

https://sra.io/blog/letitgo-a-case-study-in-expired-domains-...

Spooky stuff for sure.

I have been told a number of times I should give up on OnPrem because I could never afford to match the security of the cloud.....

The more the cloud is exposed as "just someone else's computer" the easier it is to push back the often false narrative of "too big to be insecure"

The point of the cloud was never that it’s got stronger security. Even in the early days people were constantly leaking data due to insecure S3 buckets.

Nonetheless, people repeatedly claim that using cloud vendors' high-level services is more secure than running your own stuff.

And in some instances that’s a valid claim. The problem here is you’re taking two massive generalisations and assuming they’re always mutually inclusive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com