On Jun 18, 2018, at 3:49 PM, Tomas Kuchta <tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have heard that security versus physical HW in colo argument so many > times. > > In my opinion, a padlock is way less secure than well implemented crypto. > Depends on your threat vector :-)
Also, "well implemented crypto" seems to be a struggle in itself. > The only security benefit I see from physical HW would be hosting it on > premises - if your threat vector is suponea. Both VM or HW in colo can be > legally accessed without your knowledge, which shouldn't be possible when > hosting on premises. > Maybe. A company needs to be HIPAA compliant might choose to run their own hardware rather than risk being on a public cloud when they know there are CPU bugs that can easily break their HIPAA compliance. In this case, the threat isn't the government. > Cost or special snowflake HW would be another consideration. If one gets to > rent 15U for $300 a month and if you can fully utilize that volume - you > could save considerable $$ in certain load scenarios. > Particularly in the heating/cooling arena. That could easily run $100-150 for a server that would fit in 15u. Additionally what ever bandwidth/IP allocation you get. Add to that the possibility of having many hosts on a single piece of (relatively) cheap hardware, it can be a compelling option. -- Louis Kowolowski lou...@cryptomonkeys.org Cryptomonkeys: http://www.cryptomonkeys.com/ Making life more interesting for people since 1977 _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
