Thankfully, we only have to look at Microsoft, Google and Amazon for confirmation that one of the most important elements of cloud security is retaining data ownership. You own your personal data. Businesses own their data. Any cloud storage service provider should clearly set out within its terms and conditions that this is the case and if there is ever any doubt or ambiguity, alternatives should be sourced or legal assistance called upon.
Conclusion Thankfully, we only have to look at Microsoft, Google and Amazon for confirmation that one of the most important elements of cloud security is retaining data ownership. First Name. AWS is made up of many different cloud computing products and services. The highly profitable division of Amazon provides servers, storage, networking, remote computing, email, mobile development, and security.
AWS is so large and present in the computing world that it's far outpaced its competitors. As of the first quarter of , one independent analyst reports AWS has over a third of the market at AWS has 81 availability zones in which its servers are located. These serviced regions are divided in order to allow users to set geographical limits on their services if they so choose , but also to provide security by diversifying the physical locations in which data is held.
Overall, AWS spans countries and territories. Jeff Bezos has likened Amazon Web Services to the utility companies of the early s. One hundred years ago, a factory needing electricity would build its own power plant but, once the factories were able to buy electricity from a public utility, the need for pricey private electric plants subsided. AWS is trying to move companies away from physical computing technology and onto the cloud. Traditionally, companies looking for large amounts of storage would need to physically build a storage space and maintain it.
Storing on a cloud could mean signing a pricey contract for a large amount of storage space that the company could " grow into ". The same applies to computing power. Companies that experience surge traffic would traditionally end up buying loads of power to sustain their business during peak times. On off-peak times—May for tax accountants for example—computing power lays unused, but still costing the firm money. With AWS, companies pay for what they use. AWS customers use what they need and their costs are scaled automatically and accordingly.
In fact, AWS is great for building a business from the bottom as it provides all the tools necessary for companies to start up with the cloud. For existing companies, Amazon provides low-cost migration services so that your existing infrastructure can be seamlessly moved over to AWS. As a company grows, AWS provides resources to aid in expansion.
As the business model allows for flexible usage, customers will never need to spend time thinking about whether or not they need to reexamine their computing usage. Arguably, Amazon Web Services is much more secure than a company hosting its own website or storage. AWS currently has dozens of data centers across the globe that are continuously monitored and strictly maintained.
Imagine if Netflix were to have all of its personnel files, content, and backed-up data centralized on-site on the eve of a hurricane. Chaos would ensue. In fact, localizing data in an easily identifiable location and where hundreds of people can realistically obtain access is unwise. AWS has tried to keep its data centers as hidden as possible, locating them in out-of-the-way locations and allowing access only on an essential basis. While the success of AWS is unquestionable, critics of the service say Amazon is abusing its control of the market share by engaging in anticompetitive behavior.
This criticism has come from open-source database makers who claim Amazon is copying and integrating software that was originally created by other tech companies. One such company, Elastic, filed a lawsuit against Amazon for allegedly violating trademark laws.
That made it a huge challenge to separate the various services to make a centralized development platform that would be useful for third parties. So very quietly around , we became a services company with really no fanfare.
At that point, the company took its first step toward building the AWS business by untangling that mess into a set of well-documented APIs.
While it drove the smoother development of Merchant. The executive team expected a project to take three months, but it was taking three months just to build the database, compute or storage component. Everyone was building their own resources for an individual project, with no thought to scale or reuse. I think you can guess where this is going. As the team worked, Jassy recalled, they realized they had also become quite good at running infrastructure services like compute, storage and database due to those previously articulated internal requirements.
0コメント