Hacker News Reader

I'm less familiar with AWS. But on Azure, you can have private storage accounts which aren't internet routable so they wouldn't even be able to hit the endpoints to rack up charges. It's a bit ridiculous that you'd have to go that far to avoid being charged for unauthorized access, but I'd be surprised if AWS and GCP didn't have similar capabilities.

I don't know if Backblaze charges for failed requests, but it lets you set spending limits, so the worst case is that the attacker drains the daily quota that you set and later requests fail (DoS), not that you get a surprise $1000 bill.

Not in GCP if https://cloud.google.com/storage/pricing is to be believed:

> Generally, you are not charged for operations that return 307, 4xx, or 5xx responses. The exception is 404 responses returned by buckets with Website Configuration enabled and the NotFoundPage property set to a public object in that bucket.

Heh, charging for 5xx would be even more insane than charging for 403. "Our system is not working correctly at this moment. That'll be $0.25."