 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Today I got a message saying "please update your credit card details on
our website"...
...and it *wasn't* spam. It was actually from a real company that I
really do transact with. How rare is that?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> ...and it *wasn't* spam. It was actually from a real company that I
> really do transact with. How rare is that?
Are you sure it wasn't spam that happened to be pretending to be one of the
companies you do business with?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> ...and it *wasn't* spam. It was actually from a real company that I
>> really do transact with. How rare is that?
>
> Are you sure it wasn't spam that happened to be pretending to be one of
> the companies you do business with?
Well, let me put it this way: The entire email failed to contain *any*
links at all. (They merely asked me to log in to update my details.) It
greeted me by the actual username with their system. The email contained
the (correct) last few digits of my card number. And the company in
question is tiny and virtually unknown anyway.
But sure, theoretically it could be a huge coincidence... ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-Jan-09 22:11, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> ...and it *wasn't* spam. It was actually from a real company that I
>>> really do transact with. How rare is that?
>>
>> Are you sure it wasn't spam that happened to be pretending to be one
>> of the companies you do business with?
>
> Well, let me put it this way: The entire email failed to contain *any*
> links at all. (They merely asked me to log in to update my details.) It
> greeted me by the actual username with their system. The email contained
> the (correct) last few digits of my card number. And the company in
> question is tiny and virtually unknown anyway.
>
> But sure, theoretically it could be a huge coincidence... ;-)
>
Or somebody did hack their system.
Did you give them the information they wanted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> But sure, theoretically it could be a huge coincidence... ;-)
>>
> Or somebody did hack their system.
>
> Did you give them the information they wanted?
They were writing to tell me the card number they have expires in a few
weeks' time (which is true), and wanted me to give them a new card number.
If somebody did hack their system, they already have my current card
number. And the expiry date. And my username. What more could they
possibly want?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11-Jan-09 11:16, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> But sure, theoretically it could be a huge coincidence... ;-)
>>>
>> Or somebody did hack their system.
>>
>> Did you give them the information they wanted?
>
> They were writing to tell me the card number they have expires in a few
> weeks' time (which is true), and wanted me to give them a new card number.
>
> If somebody did hack their system, they already have my current card
> number. And the expiry date. And my username. What more could they
> possibly want?
>
It is still rather unusual to ask for that information if you did not
buy anything at that moment. Unless of course the credit card is
credited monthly or so. Yet, I have never heard of such a scheme.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> If somebody did hack their system, they already have my current card
>> number. And the expiry date. And my username. What more could they
>> possibly want?
>>
> It is still rather unusual to ask for that information if you did not
> buy anything at that moment. Unless of course the credit card is
> credited monthly or so. Yet, I have never heard of such a scheme.
Credit card is billed yearly. (I forget which month though...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> But sure, theoretically it could be a huge coincidence... ;-)
Just checking. It's not like they don't target particular companies. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Today I got a message saying "please update your credit card details on
> our website"...
>
>
>
> ...and it *wasn't* spam. It was actually from a real company that I
> really do transact with. How rare is that?
>
I just received mail from "Paypal", which said that they think my
account has been compromised. It even has notes to check possible
privacy issues with real address to Paypal's security information. Just
the links are pointed to false site and the sender address wasn't
actually Paypal's.
I forwarded it to Paypals spoofbox.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
>
> I forwarded it to Paypals spoofbox.
And they answered. 10 minutes to check out that kind of mail - that's
some kind of service.
> -Aero
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Credit card is billed yearly. (I forget which month though...)
On the 11th of Jan every year, apparently. I just received this year's
invoice. ;-)
I wonder if Amazon works out any cheaper...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I wonder if Amazon works out any cheaper...
It's pretty easy to calculate. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> I wonder if Amazon works out any cheaper...
>
> It's pretty easy to calculate. :-)
It is??
I'm still trying to figure out the price structure for EC2. I mean, do
they bill you for how many hours an instance runs for? Or just how many
hours of CPU time it uses? If you get a 4-CPU instance, do they bill you
4x that?
On top of that, how much CPU time does each call to Apache actually use?
I also need to know how many hits I get in a year to compute how much a
year will cost me. Only them will I be in a position to figure out if
it's actually any cheaper.
Currently I'm wondering if EC2 would be any cheaper/faster for running
POV-Ray. But I suspect the answer is going to be "no"...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> It is??
Yep.
> I'm still trying to figure out the price structure for EC2. I mean, do
> they bill you for how many hours an instance runs for?
Yes.
> Or just how many hours of CPU time it uses?
No. Altho that would be pretty cool. :-)
> If you get a 4-CPU instance, do they bill you 4x that?
They have different per-hour prices for different capability machines. Along
with different CPUs, they have different amounts of disk and memory
available. But the price list is right there. It's per wall-clock hour,
rounded up, and counting the time it takes to boot.
> On top of that, how much CPU time does each call to Apache actually use?
Irrelevant, since it's not billed by CPU time. You'd have to guestimate your
I/O bandwidth, tho, yes.
> I also need to know how many hits I get in a year to compute how much a
> year will cost me. Only them will I be in a position to figure out if
> it's actually any cheaper.
I was assuming you had a handle on this. :-)
> Currently I'm wondering if EC2 would be any cheaper/faster for running
> POV-Ray. But I suspect the answer is going to be "no"...
Cheaper / Faster than what? Do a trial trace and see how long it takes on
your current setup and on one of Amazon's. I've noticed it can fluctuate a
bit over time, maybe 10% up and down, presumedly as other users on the
machine use some capacity, but it's pretty minor.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm still trying to figure out the price structure for EC2. I mean, do
>> they bill you for how many hours an instance runs for?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Or just how many hours of CPU time it uses?
>
> No. Altho that would be pretty cool. :-)
Right. So if you turn on an instance and it doesn't do anything, it will
still cost you hundreds of dollars per month?
Hmm... My interest in this whole idea just evapourated. :-}
>> I also need to know how many hits I get in a year to compute how much
>> a year will cost me. Only them will I be in a position to figure out
>> if it's actually any cheaper.
>
> I was assuming you had a handle on this. :-)
Nope. I guess I might be able to get some useful statistics out of the
management system, but don't hold your breath.
>> Currently I'm wondering if EC2 would be any cheaper/faster for running
>> POV-Ray. But I suspect the answer is going to be "no"...
>
> Cheaper / Faster than what? Do a trial trace and see how long it takes
> on your current setup and on one of Amazon's. I've noticed it can
> fluctuate a bit over time, maybe 10% up and down, presumedly as other
> users on the machine use some capacity, but it's pretty minor.
Faster than my current dual-core AMD Athlon64 X2 4200+ 2.2 GHz with
brass knobs on. Cheaper than, say, hiring an ordinary virtual server
from somebody, or just buying a faster PC.
The advantage of a virtual machine, of course, is that it can run overnight.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Right. So if you turn on an instance and it doesn't do anything, it will
> still cost you hundreds of dollars per month?
72 dollars a month, roughly. Why would you turn it on and not have it do
something? The point of being able to turn it on and off is to run it only
when you have something for it to do.
If you want to serve static web pages, use S3, not EC2.
> Faster than my current dual-core AMD Athlon64 X2 4200+ 2.2 GHz with
> brass knobs on.
No. Probably slower than that at the low end, potentially faster than that
at the high end. ("Low end" being the $0.10/hour and high end being
$0.80/hour.)
On the other hand, you can turn it on, run it for three hours to do the
render, and turn it off again.
> The advantage of a virtual machine, of course, is that it can run
> overnight.
Yep. And turn off when it's done. Just remember to save the output.
I have code for managing all this I haven't packaged up elegantly, but
that's what it's intended for.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Right. So if you turn on an instance and it doesn't do anything, it
>> will still cost you hundreds of dollars per month?
>
> 72 dollars a month, roughly. Why would you turn it on and not have it
> do something? The point of being able to turn it on and off is to run
> it only when you have something for it to do.
If you want to use it just for yourself, sure. If you want it to provide
a service to other people... well, no way to know when those service
requests will arrive, eh?
> If you want to serve static web pages, use S3, not EC2.
S3 only stores data. There's no way of accessing it from the outside
world again. (As far as I can tell.)
I'd actually like to run custom CGI. But paying 72$/month for a server
that gets maybe 4 hits per month seems... excessive.
>> Faster than my current dual-core AMD Athlon64 X2 4200+ 2.2 GHz with
>> brass knobs on.
>
> No. Probably slower than that at the low end, potentially faster than
> that at the high end. ("Low end" being the $0.10/hour and high end being
> $0.80/hour.)
>
> On the other hand, you can turn it on, run it for three hours to do the
> render, and turn it off again.
Three hours does not concern me. I have an animation running that's
likely to take about a week to render. But it'll take way longer if I
can only have the machine turned on for a few hours a day. (Especially
since POV-Ray takes about 30 minutes JUST TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT LEFT OFF!!)
>> The advantage of a virtual machine, of course, is that it can run
>> overnight.
>
> Yep. And turn off when it's done. Just remember to save the output.
>
> I have code for managing all this I haven't packaged up elegantly, but
> that's what it's intended for.
Looks like you'd need to script it to run POV-Ray, run VirtualDub,
somehow copy the data to S3, and then automatically shut down ASAP
before you go bankrupt!
The more I look at this, the more infeasible it looks.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> If you want to use it just for yourself, sure. If you want it to provide
> a service to other people... well, no way to know when those service
> requests will arrive, eh?
Sure. Then it's doing something.
>> If you want to serve static web pages, use S3, not EC2.
>
> S3 only stores data. There's no way of accessing it from the outside
> world again. (As far as I can tell.)
It serves any file there via HTTP, with a URL like
http://s3.amazon.com/mybucket/myfile.zip
or some such.
> I'd actually like to run custom CGI. But paying 72$/month for a server
> that gets maybe 4 hits per month seems... excessive.
There is that. What CGI is this?
> Three hours does not concern me. I have an animation running that's
> likely to take about a week to render. But it'll take way longer if I
> can only have the machine turned on for a few hours a day. (Especially
> since POV-Ray takes about 30 minutes JUST TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT LEFT
> OFF!!)
That's a pretty good use of it.
> Looks like you'd need to script it to run POV-Ray, run VirtualDub,
> somehow copy the data to S3, and then automatically shut down ASAP
> before you go bankrupt!
Not sure what the virtualdub part involves, but you can log in remotely, you
know. Posting the stuff up to S3 isn't hard either. I can give you a script
that pushes a directory up to S3 if you want, too.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> If you want to use it just for yourself, sure. If you want it to
>> provide a service to other people... well, no way to know when those
>> service requests will arrive, eh?
>
> Sure. Then it's doing something.
Perhaps you're missing my point. I get charged for running the server
24/7, when it only gets maybe 3 hits per month. That's really expensive, no?
>>> If you want to serve static web pages, use S3, not EC2.
>>
>> S3 only stores data. There's no way of accessing it from the outside
>> world again. (As far as I can tell.)
>
> It serves any file there via HTTP, with a URL like
> http://s3.amazon.com/mybucket/myfile.zip
> or some such.
Interesting. It appears from the documentation that the contents of a
bucket cannot be hierachical...
>> I'd actually like to run custom CGI. But paying 72$/month for a server
>> that gets maybe 4 hits per month seems... excessive.
>
> There is that. What CGI is this?
I have a blog, but I'm not very happy with it. I'd like to write my own
blog engine and run that. (In Haskell, naturally.)
>> Three hours does not concern me. I have an animation running that's
>> likely to take about a week to render.
>
> That's a pretty good use of it.
But would it be cheaper to buy a new Intel Core i7 and run it on that?
(Once I've bought it, I can use it endlessly for nothing.)
>> Looks like you'd need to script it to run POV-Ray, run VirtualDub,
>> somehow copy the data to S3, and then automatically shut down ASAP
>> before you go bankrupt!
>
> Not sure what the virtualdub part involves
Transforming 6,000 frames into a single AVI so I can download it.
> but you can log in remotely, you know.
What, and be charged for 7 hours of computer time when the instance has
finished rendering and is just sitting there waiting for me to tell it
to transcode the video? :-P
> Posting the stuff up to S3 isn't hard either. I can give you a
> script that pushes a directory up to S3 if you want, too.
I guess the fun part is if an instance "fails" during a render.
Apparently it can do that. No refunds...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> If you want to use it just for yourself, sure. If you want it to
>>> provide a service to other people... well, no way to know when those
>>> service requests will arrive, eh?
>>
>> Sure. Then it's doing something.
>
> Perhaps you're missing my point. I get charged for running the server
> 24/7, when it only gets maybe 3 hits per month. That's really expensive,
> no?
I understand your point. :-)
> Interesting. It appears from the documentation that the contents of a
> bucket cannot be hierachical...
URLs aren't either. Put a slash in the name of the file you store in the bucket.
It's a bit more complicated, really.
> I have a blog, but I'm not very happy with it. I'd like to write my own
> blog engine and run that. (In Haskell, naturally.)
So you're talking about the form that takes comments?
> But would it be cheaper to buy a new Intel Core i7 and run it on that?
> (Once I've bought it, I can use it endlessly for nothing.)
Certainly renting is more expensive in the long run than buying. But that's
why it's the *elastic* compute cloud, you see.
>> Not sure what the virtualdub part involves
> Transforming 6,000 frames into a single AVI so I can download it.
Ah, something you can script, then?
>> but you can log in remotely, you know.
>
> What, and be charged for 7 hours of computer time when the instance has
> finished rendering and is just sitting there waiting for me to tell it
> to transcode the video? :-P
You realize that 7 hours of compute time translates to less than a dollar,
right? Even if you let it go that long without checking, and didn't bother
to set it up to send you an email when it finished?
>> Posting the stuff up to S3 isn't hard either. I can give you a script
>> that pushes a directory up to S3 if you want, too.
>
> I guess the fun part is if an instance "fails" during a render.
> Apparently it can do that. No refunds...
I've been running one for a company for something like 2 years. The only
time it "failed" is when they told me a couple months in advance that they'd
be cutting over to a new way of doing IP addressing, and please migrate
anything over to a new machine. I.e., I've never had the machine crash.
I think it's far more CYA - "don't run your database on a machine that might
crash and never make backups then blame us" - than any expectation that any
given machine will fail at any particular time.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>> Interesting. It appears from the documentation that the contents of a
>> bucket cannot be hierachical...
>
> URLs aren't either. Put a slash in the name of the file you store in the
> bucket.
>
> It's a bit more complicated, really.
You're allowed to have special characters in object names?
>> I have a blog, but I'm not very happy with it. I'd like to write my
>> own blog engine and run that. (In Haskell, naturally.)
>
> So you're talking about the form that takes comments?
Yes. But also the interface that allows me, the blog owner, to add new
blog entries without logging into the virtual server over SSH and
manually editing half a dozen HTML pages. (And, ideally, convert my
custom markup into valid HTML.)
> Certainly renting is more expensive in the long run than buying. But
> that's why it's the *elastic* compute cloud, you see.
Uh... no, I don't really see.
Unless you mean that ranting 20 quad-core virtual machines for a day is
cheaper than *buying* a renderfarm?
>>> Not sure what the virtualdub part involves
>> Transforming 6,000 frames into a single AVI so I can download it.
>
> Ah, something you can script, then?
Indeed.
>> What, and be charged for 7 hours of computer time when the instance
>> has finished rendering and is just sitting there waiting for me to
>> tell it to transcode the video? :-P
>
> You realize that 7 hours of compute time translates to less than a
> dollar, right? Even if you let it go that long without checking, and
> didn't bother to set it up to send you an email when it finished?
Right. Because sending an email is way easier than scripting VirtualDub.
Oh, wait - no it isn't. :-P
>> I guess the fun part is if an instance "fails" during a render.
>> Apparently it can do that. No refunds...
>
> I've been running one for a company for something like 2 years.
Running what? An EC2 instance?
Perhaps you can answer a small question for me then: It seems simple
enough how a random dude like me can sign up and start using AWS. But
what if you're trying to use it for commercial purposes? How does giving
multiple administrators control over the system work?
> I've never had the machine crash.
>
> I think it's far more CYA - "don't run your database on a machine that
> might crash and never make backups then blame us" - than any expectation
> that any given machine will fail at any particular time.
Mmm, OK.
Of course, you get charged money for performing backups. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> You're allowed to have special characters in object names?
Define "special". Sure, I think you can have most any unicode character you
want in a name. There might be a handful you can't, but slash isn't one of
them. Indeed, slash is in *most* of the names, because the tools that deal
with heirarchical names assumes that.
> But also the interface that allows me, the blog owner, to add new
> blog entries without logging into the virtual server over SSH and
> manually editing half a dozen HTML pages. (And, ideally, convert my
> custom markup into valid HTML.)
That's what offline processing is for. :-) Make the changes locally, run
your script that turns them into valid HTML, and post any changes up to S3.
Run the CGI script on your own machine at home and do the same. (Doesn't the
URL for posts let you specify something to go as a mailto without human
interaction? It's been so long since I had to worry about not actually
having a server running.....)
>> Certainly renting is more expensive in the long run than buying. But
>> that's why it's the *elastic* compute cloud, you see.
>
> Uh... no, I don't really see.
It's elastic because you can rent more machines when you need to go faster
and fewer when you need to go slower. It's just problematic for you that you
can't rent less than one machine at a time. :-)
> Unless you mean that ranting 20 quad-core virtual machines for a day is
> cheaper than *buying* a renderfarm?
Exactly.
> Right. Because sending an email is way easier than scripting VirtualDub.
> Oh, wait - no it isn't. :-P
Sure it is, if you have things configured properly.
mail -s "your render is done" me### [at] example com </dev/null
Admittedly, getting the mail to come out at your ISP without the firewall
etc getting in the way is tricky sometimes. Spam has made most ISPs really
lock down their servers.
Or create a page you can look at on the web server running on the EC2
instance to see how far along you are. :)
>> I've been running one for a company for something like 2 years.
> Running what? An EC2 instance?
Yes.
> Perhaps you can answer a small question for me then: It seems simple
> enough how a random dude like me can sign up and start using AWS. But
> what if you're trying to use it for commercial purposes? How does giving
> multiple administrators control over the system work?
The same as if its your own machine. You create multiple logins, give each
a different SSH key, and let people log in that way.
When you start up the machine, you give it the public key for root to log in
with. From there on, it's completely your machine. If you get the one
running Windows, I imagine you can get it to join your domain, for example.
> Of course, you get charged money for performing backups. ;-)
No, but you get charged money for holding on to backups. Data from EC2 to S3
is free, last I looked.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> You're allowed to have special characters in object names?
>
> Define "special". Sure, I think you can have most any unicode character
> you want in a name. There might be a handful you can't, but slash isn't
> one of them. Indeed, slash is in *most* of the names, because the tools
> that deal with heirarchical names assumes that.
Looking at the protocol-level implementation, I'm guessing you can't
include newline characters in an object key. ;-)
>> But also the interface that allows me, the blog owner, to add new blog
>> entries without logging into the virtual server over SSH and manually
>> editing half a dozen HTML pages. (And, ideally, convert my custom
>> markup into valid HTML.)
>
> That's what offline processing is for. :-) Make the changes locally,
> run your script that turns them into valid HTML, and post any changes up
> to S3. Run the CGI script on your own machine at home and do the same.
> (Doesn't the URL for posts let you specify something to go as a mailto
> without human interaction? It's been so long since I had to worry about
> not actually having a server running.....)
Yeah, you can do it with offline processing. But I found that when I did
it that way, I almost *never* posted any blog entries. It was just too
much effort to add a source file, run the processing tool, run a
seperate tool that zips up the changed files, log in to my host, upload
the zip file, unzip it over the WWWroot folder...
Currently I have a real blog interface. I can update my blog from any
PC, anywhere on the Internet, without any special tools. The only
problem is that it's 100% non-compliant as far as standards go. Oh, and
buggy as hell! (It keeps "eating" my formatting instructions... and the
CSS eats bullets.)
>> Unless you mean that ranting 20 quad-core virtual machines for a day
>> is cheaper than *buying* a renderfarm?
>
> Exactly.
Hmm. I still don't think I can afford that, so it's kinda moot.
>> Right. Because sending an email is way easier than scripting
>> VirtualDub. Oh, wait - no it isn't. :-P
>
> Sure it is, if you have things configured properly.
>
> Admittedly, getting the mail to come out at your ISP without the
> firewall etc getting in the way is tricky sometimes. Spam has made most
> ISPs really lock down their servers.
Er, yeah. This is the problem part. It is almost impossible to get any
SMTP server on earth to accept inbound SMTP messages. I've tried.
>> Perhaps you can answer a small question for me then: It seems simple
>> enough how a random dude like me can sign up and start using AWS. But
>> what if you're trying to use it for commercial purposes? How does
>> giving multiple administrators control over the system work?
>
> The same as if its your own machine. You create multiple logins, give
> each a different SSH key, and let people log in that way.
How about S3 though? From the looks of it, I can set up my own AWS
account, and then I can upload content. But what if you have a team of
devs producing content that you want to upload? Do you really have to
give them all the root password to do that? (This appears to violate the
AWS AUP.)
>> Of course, you get charged money for performing backups. ;-)
>
> No, but you get charged money for holding on to backups. Data from EC2
> to S3 is free, last I looked.
Oh *God*, I've lost track of which transfers are free and which ones get
charged at both friggin' ends. E.g., traffic from SQS to EC2 US is free,
but from SQS to EC2 EU is chargable one-way.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Looking at the protocol-level implementation, I'm guessing you can't
> include newline characters in an object key. ;-)
You might be able to if you encode them appropriately, as %0A for example.
> Yeah, you can do it with offline processing. But I found that when I did
> it that way, I almost *never* posted any blog entries. It was just too
> much effort to add a source file, run the processing tool, run a
> seperate tool that zips up the changed files, log in to my host, upload
> the zip file, unzip it over the WWWroot folder...
Insufficient automation. It should be one click.
> Currently I have a real blog interface. I can update my blog from any
> PC, anywhere on the Internet, without any special tools. The only
> problem is that it's 100% non-compliant as far as standards go. Oh, and
> buggy as hell! (It keeps "eating" my formatting instructions... and the
> CSS eats bullets.)
... and that it requires you to run a real server. ;-)
> Er, yeah. This is the problem part. It is almost impossible to get any
> SMTP server on earth to accept inbound SMTP messages. I've tried.
Um, no, it's not *that* hard, assuming you're subscribed to the ISP.
> How about S3 though? From the looks of it, I can set up my own AWS
> account, and then I can upload content. But what if you have a team of
> devs producing content that you want to upload? Do you really have to
> give them all the root password to do that?
You can give them write permission to the bucket on a user-by-user basis.
They'll still need some sort of AWS key, tho, yes.
> Oh *God*, I've lost track of which transfers are free and which ones get
> charged at both friggin' ends. E.g., traffic from SQS to EC2 US is free,
> but from SQS to EC2 EU is chargable one-way.
Probably because SQS is hosted in the USA. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Looking at the protocol-level implementation, I'm guessing you can't
>> include newline characters in an object key. ;-)
>
> You might be able to if you encode them appropriately, as %0A for example.
Ah. So the keys are URL-encoded?
>> Yeah, you can do it with offline processing. But I found that when I
>> did it that way, I almost *never* posted any blog entries. It was just
>> too much effort to add a source file, run the processing tool, run a
>> seperate tool that zips up the changed files, log in to my host,
>> upload the zip file, unzip it over the WWWroot folder...
>
> Insufficient automation. It should be one click.
How do you log into a website and click some JavaScript-powered buttons
from a script?
Besides, even then, I can only update the blog from the one PC that has
the source code and all the automation scripts installed.
>> Currently I have a real blog interface. I can update my blog from any
>> PC, anywhere on the Internet, without any special tools. The only
>> problem is that it's 100% non-compliant as far as standards go. Oh,
>> and buggy as hell! (It keeps "eating" my formatting instructions...
>> and the CSS eats bullets.)
>
> ... and that it requires you to run a real server. ;-)
Well, no, I got it for free as part of my web hosting package. But if I
wanted to change to a different blog engine (say, one that doesn't SUCK
as much), I'd have to pay £15/month for a virtual server instead. (And
configure Apache by hand - which is pretty hard.)
>> Er, yeah. This is the problem part. It is almost impossible to get any
>> SMTP server on earth to accept inbound SMTP messages. I've tried.
>
> Um, no, it's not *that* hard, assuming you're subscribed to the ISP.
Well, I've never got it to work, let's put it that way.
>> How about S3 though? From the looks of it, I can set up my own AWS
>> account, and then I can upload content. But what if you have a team of
>> devs producing content that you want to upload? Do you really have to
>> give them all the root password to do that?
>
> You can give them write permission to the bucket on a user-by-user
> basis. They'll still need some sort of AWS key, tho, yes.
Right. So there *is* a capability to set up multiple user accounts in
AWS then? (Which is what I was trying to get at.)
>> Oh *God*, I've lost track of which transfers are free and which ones
>> get charged at both friggin' ends. E.g., traffic from SQS to EC2 US is
>> free, but from SQS to EC2 EU is chargable one-way.
>
> Probably because SQS is hosted in the USA. :-)
Well yeah, but you see my point. Figuring out what is and isn't free is
a complex minefield. The pricing structure is so complicated...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Ah. So the keys are URL-encoded?
The keys *are* URLs. That's why they think they have a REST interface.
>> Insufficient automation. It should be one click.
>
> How do you log into a website and click some JavaScript-powered buttons
> from a script?
I meant that your offline solution was insufficiently automated, as you
described it just above where I said "insufficient automation."
As for your second question, remember that Javascript only sends stuff over
IP in the first place. You automate it the same way the browser does, if
it's worthwhile.
>>> Er, yeah. This is the problem part. It is almost impossible to get
>>> any SMTP server on earth to accept inbound SMTP messages. I've tried.
>> Um, no, it's not *that* hard, assuming you're subscribed to the ISP.
> Well, I've never got it to work, let's put it that way.
I wish *I* was that good.
> Right. So there *is* a capability to set up multiple user accounts in
> AWS then? (Which is what I was trying to get at.)
I'm not sure what you mean. Firstly, "AWS" isn't all one service. Different
services have essentially unrelated security setups. Secondly, I don't think
you can set up "multiple user accounts" other than setting up a bunch of
individual accounts. You *can* give specific people permissions to do
specific things with specific files or buckets. I.e., I think you can set up
a bucket such that only these specific three people can create files in it.
I'm not sure exactly what the permutations are, tho.
> Well yeah, but you see my point. Figuring out what is and isn't free is
> a complex minefield. The pricing structure is so complicated...
Most pay-as-you-go things are. If you're just interested in S3 and ECC, look
at just those prices.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> How about S3 though? From the looks of it, I can set up my own AWS
> account, and then I can upload content. But what if you have a team of
> devs producing content that you want to upload? Do you really have to
> give them all the root password to do that?
Of course not. If you're root, you can create new accounts.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> How about S3 though? From the looks of it, I can set up my own AWS
>> account, and then I can upload content. But what if you have a team of
>> devs producing content that you want to upload? Do you really have to
>> give them all the root password to do that?
>
> Of course not. If you're root, you can create new accounts.
We're talking about "virtual" root users.
I think each user or group of users would have to have their own amazon
account, and you would have to set the ACLs on the buckets to make it work.
Yeah, you can do that. Give each person a different Amazon login, and then
set up the permissions on buckets to allow uploads/downloads.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
