Two things caught my attention in the IT world this week.
The first was an unfortunate and catastrophic incident involving Danish cloud provider CloudNordic. The cloud provider told customers this week that following a ransomware attack that all their data was effectively lost and they were not prepared or had the means to negotiate with the attackers. The firm believes that the attack happened during a move from one data centre to another as the unknowingly infected servers were brought to the same network as their administration systems. Thankfully it appears that no data has been taken by the attackers however all the backups the company retained were also encrypted.
This isn’t and shouldn’t be a “told you so” moment or an argument against going to the cloud but it does serve as a reminder that even though your systems are in the cloud you really need to have a complete & tested backup of critical data. If the situation arises like this event and the provider is totally compromised you may be left in a disaster recovery situation you can’t fully recover from. Doesn’t matter if you are a customer of a hyperscaler like Microsoft or AWS because whilst your data ought to be safe on their servers it still doesn’t negate the need for your own off-site backups.
I really do feel sorry for the engineers at CloudNordic right now and wish them the best for the recovery effort.
Second was a piece in ISP Review that Ofcom decided it was time to consult on the use of “Fibre” in marketing for broadband services in the UK which quite clearly weren’t fully fibre optic. We’re talking mainly about ISPs reselling Openreach based VDSL2 which is Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) with the country’s expansive copper telephone cables used for the “last mile” to the property and Virgin Media who use Coaxial cables in a similar fashion.
Does anybody remember the halcyon days of the late 00s to late 10s where ISPs marketing broadband were getting away with vague terms such as “Meg” to describe download speeds, “up to” for ADSL2+ technologies that couldn’t possibly offer the 24mbps speeds advertised and – personal favourite for this one – advertising services as “unlimited” but burying an actual limit into the so-called Fair Use Policy (or “FUP”).
Yes. This would be the next battle in that ongoing saga.
It really should be a no-no that confusing marketing terms like all of the aforementioned should be allowed to creep into marketing materials. Advertising a product as “Fibre” (of which the attainable speed with such technology is theoretically limitless) despite there being copper used in the delivery just means the consumer is actually receiving a service not strictly as described.
It’s important for the UK economy that we have access to fast, reliable and affordable broadband services and advertising them fairly which means accurate & correctly is the first step in the uptake process for the end-user. There shouldn’t be terms like “full-fibre” to differentiate FTTC (Fibre to the cabinet) and FTTP/B (Fibre to the Premise/Building) for example.
