• snaptastic@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s the correct way to implement it so that it can still be automated? Credentials that can write new backups but not delete existing ones?

    • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if it is the „correct“ way but I do it the other way around. I have a server and a backup server. Server user can‘t even see backup server but packs a backup, backup server pulls the data with read only access, main server deletes backup, done.

    • VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      For an organisation hosting as many companies data as this one I’d expect automated tape at a minimum. Of course, if the attacker had the time to start messing with the tape that’s lost as well but it’s unlikely.

      • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It depends what’s the pricing. For example ovh didn’t keep any extra backup when their datacenter took fire. But if a customer paid for backup, it was kept off-site and was recovered

        It might be even pretending to be a big hosting company when they’re actually renting a dozen deds from a big player, much cheaper than maintaining a data center with 99.999% uptime

    • rentar42@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fundamentally there’s no need for the user/account that saves the backup somewhere to be able to read let alone change/delete it.

      So ideally you have “write-only” credentials that can only append/add new files.

      How exactly that is implemented depends on the tech. S3 and S3 compatible systems can often be configured that data straight up can’t be deleted from a bucket at all.