or didn’t have a defense against a 0 day.

firewalls are not for defending against 0 days. it is about access control, and reducing, sometimes even minimizing access to potentially vulnerable services. firewalls are not an infallible security tool, but there is no such thing either. the reason to use it is to restrict access such that fewer attackers can take advantage of a potential vulnerability.

there are intrusion detection/prevention systems that could do more, but it’s unlikely they will protect against 0 days, because 0 days are undiscovered and unknown issues.

So the vlan doesn’t do anything either way.

it does. its useful to force traffic through a firewall. its for limiting what has access to what. if you wouldn’t use vlans, hosts on the network would not care about your firewall because they can just go straight to the destination.

I’m not sure I understand your argument, but I think what you say is, firewalls are not infallible so they are useless

Then I was not sure what you meant by this:

I don’t actually know if this is the right way to calculate it, but if for each disk you count the time separately, and add it together for a combined MTBF, then that is 20 out of the 136 MTBF years.

5 years of drive runtime for one drive. 20 “years” for 4 drives, 40 “years” for 8 drives. I say “years” because the way I mean it is like this: running 4 drives for 10 minutes is 40 minutes of combined drive runtime. running 4 drives for 5 years is 20 years of drive runtime. I think calculating it like this can be compared to MTBF. but again, I’m not totally confident that it really works this way.

All in all, I am at this point only trying to track down and relay what I’m seeing about SAS vs SATA.

I think it might be because SATA drives you normally run across, especially in laptops, are not the enterprise kind, but consumer drives built from cheaper components and simpler designs. and those are lower quality. while SAS drives are always enterprise grade.

but still, in my experience SATA drives can have a long life too. but it may be more unpredictable than enterprise SATA/SAS drives

HP says that SAS is more reliable

could be controller chips and cable quality. but also, SFF-8644 type SAS connector can be used to attach a drive to multiple HBA cards as I heard, maybe even multiple machines, for redundancy

if you allowed that to happen you either did not set firewall rules strict enough, or if the client doing the compromise absolutely had to have access to the vulnerable service then you did everything you could to limit the chance of it happening.

usually the solution to that is to limit who can access what more strictly. dont allow user devices like smartphones on the iot vlan, as any app running on the phone could be doing nefarious things. only allow the iot devices and the home assistant service on the iot vlan, and user devices will only talk to home assistant, something supposedly more secure than whatever iot devices there are.
similarly, don’t allow user devices to access the ip cameras. put the ip cameras on a network where only the NVR software can access them, and user devices will only access the NVR. if you can, don’t put the whole operating system of these services on the iot and ipcam vlans either. this is possible when the services run in containers, because you can pass in only vlan specific interfaces to the containers. if not using containers, you can still use the operating systems firewall to filter incoming traffic.

if you set up proper network filtering, the “if” in “If your firewall couldn’t stop it” will become a pretty big “if”

I’m a repair depot I typically didn’t see drives that live much longer than 17k hours (just under 2 years).

I have a bunch of working drives with 2+ years, and in my area almost everyone still has their system installed on old hard drives

that it would be difficult to project an average lifetime of 20 years

I did not mean an average timeline of 20 years

that when Backblaze mentions consumer vs enterprise drives they are possibly discussing SATA vs SAS.

there are plenty of enterprise SATA drives

This comes from the realization that enterprise workstation drives are still just consumer drives with a part number label on them (seen in Dell and HP Enterprise equipment).

that’s workstation drives. Obviously if your work buys 2 TB wd blue drives they won’t become enterprise drives. enterprise drives include like that of wd red pro, ultrastars, etc, which do use the SATA interface.

it never occurred to me that they have taken fingerprints when crossing borders to exit the EU

The security reason generally doesn’t exist for home labs because most need to setup bridging or you can’t access the devices on the secure vlan at all.

bridging can be set up in a limited fashion. it could happen with a firewall doing routing and filtering

that mathematically does not stand.

if a drive costs 1000 and another 2000, it cannot be that all is worse than each other!

thanks! as you say because tye 5 vs 136 years it does not really matter in our environment, but it probably starts mattering when you have lots of disks.

I don’t actually know if this is the right way to calculate it, but if for each disk you count the time separately, and add it together for a combined MTBF, then that is 20 out of the 136 MTBF years.
But with 30 drives that will be 150 and indicate that you will likely have at least one error of some kind because of using SATA

you are missing the point.

It’s fine that a border guard checks my passport and lets me to go my way. who cares. It’s reasonable, and I believe that it’s for our safety. but automated checks do more: they log the exact times you crossed the border, store it for decades. all the unnecessary data will most likely leak or be used for nefarious purposes at some point.

its like forced digital passes on public transport. when the driver checks your passes, no private info about my traveling/commuting habits is collected. but when passes need to be scanned, it is: gov id, time, location, stop number, line number. the public transport company really has no business in knowing when do I go to work, when do I head home, or when do I start using a different stop regularly, as it reveals so many other things about you, like whether you do anything in the city after work and how frequent is that.

I travel over the border much less, but my point stands.

What are you actually preserving by avoiding having your face scanned?

in addition to the above, by having fewer face scans uploaded to the system, I expect the surveillance cameras on the streets to do a worse job on facial recognition even when I’m just going about my day in my home country.

Tintás Tunyacsáp in Hungarian, but mostly just Tunyacsáp. It translates back to Inked Lame Tentacle

Supposedly SATA controllers are also not built for the abuse I have been throwing them in my machines, and I don’t want to push it.

what makes you say that?

that’s dumb. there are still better and worse prices

exactly, it does not need to be automated, and then less info is required.

Automation in these areas often increases the amount of collected information by a lot.

if they can detect it, why couldn’t they block it?

I fully expect my government to keep a record of all its citizens.

they don’t reasonably need biometric data to keep a record. they do need it, that’s not what I dispute, but not reasonably.

The scraping/bandwidth abuse problem can easily be worked around.

how?

anubis does not protect the APIs, and it cannot protect against bot traffic coming from many different residential proxies

for anyone reading this, Codeberg/Forgejo can migrate issues too! use the “new migration” function in the menu where you create new repositories, and tick the box for copying issues and wiki. it is a one time copy only, though, so if you are dedicated you should restrict issues on the github repo to collaborators only, so that people can’t open new issues (which won’t be able to be synced anymore), but old ones are still readable in their original form.

syncing issues cannot be done later, it’s for new repos only