It's Thanksgiving here in the U.S., so in between baking, roasting and watching Risk Astley rickroll millions in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, I had a thought about how the utility and agility of the cloud computing models such as Amazon AWS (EC2/S3) and the pricing models that go along with them can actually pose a very nasty risk to those who use the cloud to provide service.
That thought -- in between vigorous whisking during cranberry sauce construction -- got me noodling about how the pay-as-you-go model could be used for nefarious means.
Specifically, this usage-based model potentially enables $evil_person who knows that a service is cloud-based to manipulate service usage billing in orders of magnitude that could be disguised easily as legitimate use of the service but drive costs to unmanageable levels.
If you take Amazon's AWS usage-based pricing model (check out the cost calculator here,) one might envision that instead of worrying about a lack of resources, the elasticity of the cloud could actually provide a surplus of compute, network and storage utility that could be just as bad as a deficit.
Instead of worrying about Distributed Denial of Service (DDos) attacks from botnets and the like, imagine having to worry about delicately balancing forecasted need with capabilities like Cloudbursting to deal with a botnet designed to make seemingly legitimate requests for service to generate an economic denial of sustainability (EDoS) -- where the dyamicism of the infrastructure allows scaling of service beyond the economic means of the vendor to pay their cloud-based service bills.
Imagine the shock of realizing that the outsourcing to the cloud to reduce CapEx and move to an OpEx model just meant that while availability, confidentiality and integrity of your service and assets are solid, your sustainability and survivability are threatened.
I know there exists the ability to control instance sprawl and constrain costs, but imagine if this is managed improperly or inexactly because we can't distinguish between legitimate and targeted resource consumption from an "attack."
If you're in the business of ensuring availability of service for large events on the web for a timed event, are you really going to limit service when you think it might drive revenues?
I think this is where service governors will have to get much more intelligent regarding how services are being consumed and how that affects the transaction supply chain and embed logic that takes into account financial risk when scaling to ensure EDoS doesn't kill you.
I can't say that I haven't had similar concerns when dealing with scalability and capacity planning in hosted or dedicated co-location environments, but generally storage and compute were not billable service options I had to worry about, only network bandwidth.
Back to the mashed potatoes.