Tag Archives: Business

ROI is not a cybersecurity concept

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/08/roi-is-not-cybersecurity-concept.html

In the cybersecurity community, much time is spent trying to speak the language of business, in order to communicate to business leaders our problems. One way we do this is trying to adapt the concept of “return on investment” or “ROI” to explain why they need to spend more money. Stop doing this. It’s nonsense. ROI is a concept pushed by vendors in order to justify why you should pay money for their snake oil security products. Don’t play the vendor’s game.

The correct concept is simply “risk analysis”. Here’s how it works.

List out all the risks. For each risk, calculate:

  • How often it occurs.
  • How much damage it does.
  • How to mitigate it.
  • How effective the mitigation is (reduces chance and/or cost).
  • How much the mitigation costs.

If you have risk of something that’ll happen once-per-day on average, costing $1000 each time, then a mitigation costing $500/day that reduces likelihood to once-per-week is a clear win for investment.

Now, ROI should in theory fit directly into this model. If you are paying $500/day to reduce that risk, I could use ROI to show you hypothetical products that will …

  • …reduce the remaining risk to once-per-month for an additional $10/day.
  • …replace that $500/day mitigation with a $400/day mitigation.

But this is never done. Companies don’t have a sophisticated enough risk matrix in order to plug in some ROI numbers to reduce cost/risk. Instead, ROI is a calculation is done standalone by a vendor pimping product, or a security engineer building empires within the company.

If you haven’t done risk analysis to begin with (and almost none of you have), then ROI calculations are pointless.

But there are further problems. This is risk analysis as done in industries like oil and gas, which have inanimate risk. Almost all their risks are due to accidental failures, like in the Deep Water Horizon incident. In our industry, cybersecurity, risks are animate — by hackers. Our risk models are based on trying to guess what hackers might do.

An example of this problem is when our drug company jacks up the price of an HIV drug, Anonymous hackers will break in and dump all our financial data, and our CFO will go to jail. A lot of our risks come now from the technical side, but the whims and fads of the hacker community.

Another example is when some Google researcher finds a vuln in WordPress, and our website gets hacked by that three months from now. We have to forecast not only what hackers can do now, but what they might be able to do in the future.

Finally, there is this problem with cybersecurity that we really can’t distinguish between pesky and existential threats. Take ransomware. A lot of large organizations have just gotten accustomed to just wiping a few worker’s machines every day and restoring from backups. It’s a small, pesky problem of little consequence. Then one day a ransomware gets domain admin privileges and takes down the entire business for several weeks, as happened after #nPetya. Inevitably our risk models always come down on the high side of estimates, with us claiming that all threats are existential, when in fact, most companies continue to survive major breaches.

These difficulties with risk analysis leads us to punting on the problem altogether, but that’s not the right answer. No matter how faulty our risk analysis is, we still have to go through the exercise.

One model of how to do this calculation is architecture. We know we need a certain number of toilets per building, even without doing ROI on the value of such toilets. The same is true for a lot of security engineering. We know we need firewalls, encryption, and OWASP hardening, even without specifically doing a calculation. Passwords and session cookies need to go across SSL. That’s the starting point from which we start to analysis risks and mitigations — what we need beyond SSL, for example.

So stop using “ROI”, or worse, the abomination “ROSI”. Start doing risk analysis.

[$] Business accounting with GnuCash

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/731126/rss

The first stop in the search for a free accounting system that can replace
QuickBooks is a familiar waypoint: the GnuCash application. GnuCash has been
around for many years and is known primarily as a personal-finance tool,
but it has acquired some business features as well. The question is: are
those business features solid enough to allow the program to serve as a
replacement for QuickBooks?

On ISO standardization of blockchains

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/08/on-iso-standardization-of-blockchains.html

So ISO, the primary international standards organization, is seeking to standardize blockchain technologies. On the surface, this seems a reasonable idea, creating a common standard that everyone can interoperate with.

But it can be silly idea in practice. I mean, it should not be assumed that this is a good thing to do.

The value of official standards

You don’t need the official imprimatur of a government committee for something to be a “standard”. The Internet itself is a prime example of that.

In the 1980s, the ISO and the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) pursued competing standards for creating a world-wide “internet”. The IETF was an informal group of technologist that had essentially no official standing.

The ISO version of the Internet failed. Their process was to bring multiple stakeholders from business, government, and universities together in committees to debate competing interests. The result was something so horrible that it could never work in practice.

The IETF succeeded. It consisted of engineers just building things. Rather than officially “standardized”, these things were “described”, so that others knew enough to build their own version that interoperated. Once lots of different people built interoperating versions of something, then it became a “standard”.

In other words, the way the Internet came to be, standardization followed interoperability — it didn’t create interoperability.

In the end, the ISO gave up on their standards and adopted the IETF standards. The ISO brought no value to the development of Internet standards. Whether they ratified the Internet’s “TCP/IP” standard, ignored it, or condemned it, the Internet would exist today anyway, and a competing ISO-blessed internetwork would not.

The same question exists for blockchain technologies. Groups are off busy innovating quickly, creating their own standards. If the ISO blesses one, or creates its own, it’s unlikely to have any impact on interoperability.

Blockchain vs. chaining blocks

The excitement over blockchains is largely driven by people who don’t know the details, who don’t understand the difference between a blockchain like Bitcoin and the problem they are trying to solve.

Consider a record keeping system, especially public records. Storing them in a blockchain seems like a natural idea.

But in fact, it’s a terrible idea. A Bitcoin-style blockchain has a lot of features you don’t want, like “proof-of-work” signing. It is also missing necessary features, like bulk storage with redundancy (backups). Sure, Bitcoin has redundancy, but by brute force, storing the blockchain in thousands of places around the Internet. This is far from what a public records system would need, which would store a lot more data with far fewer backup copies (fewer than 10).

The only real overlap between Bitcoin and a public records system is a “signing chain”. But this is something that already existed before Bitcoin. It’s what Bitcoin blockchain was built on top of — it’s not the blockchain itself.

It’s like people discovering “cryptography” for the first time when they looked at Bitcoin, ignoring the thousand year history of crypto, and now every time they see a need for “crypto” they think “Bitcoin blockchain”.

Consensus and forking

The entire point of Bitcoin, the reason it was created, was as the antithesis to centralized standardization like ISO. Standardizing blockchains misses the entire point of their existence. The Bitcoin manifesto is that standardization comes from acclamation not proclamation, and that many different standards are preferable to a single one.

This is not just a theoretical idea but one built into Bitcoin’s blockchain technology. “Consensus” is achieved by the proof-of-work mechanism, so that those who do the most work are the ones that drive the consensus. When irreconcilable differences arise, the blockchain “forks”, with each side continuing on with their now non-interoperable blockchains. Such forks are not a sin, but part of the natural evolution.

We saw this with the recent fork of Bitcoin. There are now so many transactions that they exceed the size of blocks. One group chose a change to make transactions smaller. Another group chose a change to make block sizes larger.

It is this problem, of consensus, that is the innovation that Bitcoin created with blockchains, not the chain signing of public transaction records.


What “blockchain standardization” is going to mean in practice is not the blockchain itself, but trying to standardize the Ethereum version. What makes Ethereum different is the “smart contracts” programming language, which has financial institutions excited.

This is a bad idea because from a cybersecurity perspective, Ethereum’s programming language is flawed. Different bugs in “smart contracts” have led to multiple $100-million hacks, such as the infamous “DAO collapse”.

While it has interesting possibilities, we should be scared of standardizing Ethereum’s language before it works.


People who matter are too busy innovating, creating their own blockchain standards. There is little that the ISO can do to improve this. Their official imprimatur is not needed to foster innovation and interoperability — if they are consequential at anything, it’ll just be interfering.

Streaming Service iflix Buys Shows Based on Piracy Data

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/streaming-service-iflix-buys-shows-based-on-piracy-data-170819/

When major movie and TV companies discuss piracy they often mention the massive losses incurred as a result of unauthorized downloads and streams.

However, this unofficial market also offers a valuable pool of often publicly available data on the media consumption habits of a relatively young generation.

Many believe that piracy is in part a market signal showing copyright holders what consumers want. This makes piracy statistics key business intelligence, which some companies have started to realize.

Netflix, for example, previously said that their offering is partly based on what shows do well on BitTorrent networks and other pirate sites. In addition, the streaming service also uses piracy to figure out how much they can charge in a country. They are not alone.

Other major entertainment companies also keep a close eye on piracy, using this data to their advantage. This includes the Asia-based streaming portal iFlix, which recently secured $133 million in funding and boasts to have over five million users.

Iflix co-founder Patrick Grove says that his company actively uses piracy numbers to determine what content they acquire. The data reveal what is popular locally, and help to give viewers the TV-shows and movies they’re most interested in.

“We looked at piracy data in every market,” Grove informed CNBC’s Managing Asia, which doesn’t stop at looking at a few torrent download numbers.

Representatives from the Asian company actually went out on the streets to buy pirated DVDs from street vendors. In addition, iflix also received help from local Internet providers which shared a variety of streaming data.

TorrentFreak reached out to the streaming service to get more details about their data gathering techniques. One of the main partners to measure online piracy is the German company TECXIPIO, which is known to actively monitor BitTorrent traffic.

The company also maintains a close relationship with Internet providers that offer further insight, including streaming data, to determine which titles work best in each market.

While analyzing the different sets of data, the streaming service was surprised to see the diversity in different regions as well as the ever-changing consumer demand.

“Through looking at the Top 20 pirated DVDs in every market we are live in, we were surprised to find the amount of pirated K-drama content. In Ghana for example, the number one pirated title is K-drama series called ‘Legend of the Blue Sea’,” an iflix spokesperson told us.

Iflix believes that piracy data is superior to other market intelligence. Before rolling out its service in Saudi Arabia the company made a list of the 1,000 most popular shows and used that to its advantage.

While there is a lot of piracy in emerging markets, iflix doesn’t think that people are not willing to pay for entertainment. It just has to be available for a decent price, and that’s where they come in.

“We believe that people in emerging markets do not actively want to steal content, they do so because there is no better alternative,” the company informs us.

“As consumers become more connected, gaining access to information and cultural influences on a global scale, they want to be entertained at a world-class standard. We set out with the aim of offering an alternative that is better than piracy; by providing unlimited access to high-quality, world-class entertainment, all at the price of pirated DVD.”

There is no doubt that iflix is ambitious, and that it’s willing to employ some unusual tactics to grow its userbase. The company is quite optimistic about the future as well, judging from its co-founder’s prediction that it will welcome its billionth viewer in a few years.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Rightscorp Bleeds Another Million, Borrows $200K From Customer BMG

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/rightscorp-bleeds-another-million-borrows-200k-from-customer-bmg-170819/

Anti-piracy outfit Rightscorp is one of the many companies trying to turn Internet piracy into profit. The company has a somewhat novel approach but has difficulty balancing the books.

Essentially, Rightscorp operates like other so-called copyright-trolling operations, in that it monitors alleged offenders on BitTorrent networks, tracks them to their ISPs, then attempts to extract a cash settlement. Rightscorp does this by sending DMCA notices with settlement agreements attached, in the hope that at-this-point-anonymous Internet users break cover in panic. This can lead to a $20 or $30 ‘fine’ or in some cases dozens of multiples of that.

But despite settling hundreds of thousands of these cases, profit has thus far proven elusive, with the company hemorrhaging millions in losses. The company has just filed its results for the first half of 2017 and they contain more bad news.

In the six months ended June 2017, revenues obtained from copyright settlements reached just $138,514, that’s 35% down on the $214,326 generated in the same period last year. However, the company did manage to book $148,332 in “consulting revenue” in the first half of this year, a business area that generated no revenue in 2016.

Overall then, total revenue for the six month period was $286,846 – up from $214,326 last year. While that’s a better picture in its own right, Rightscorp has a lot of costs attached to its business.

After paying out $69,257 to copyright holders and absorbing $1,190,696 in general and administrative costs, among other things, the company’s total operating expenses topped out at $1,296,127 for the first six months of the year.

To make a long story short, the company made a net loss of $1,068,422, which was more than the $995,265 loss it made last year and despite improved revenues. The company ended June with just $1,725 in cash.

“These factors raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued,” the company’s latest statement reads.

This hanging-by-a-thread narrative has followed Rightscorp for the past few years but there’s information in the latest accounts which indicates how bad things were at the start of the year.

In January 2016, Rightscorp and several copyright holders, including Hollywood studio Warner Bros, agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit over intimidating robo-calls that were made to alleged infringers. The defendants agreed to set aside $450,000 to cover the costs, and it appears that Rightscorp was liable for at least $200,000 of that.

Rightscorp hasn’t exactly been flush with cash, so it was interesting to read that its main consumer piracy settlement client, music publisher BMG, actually stepped in to pay off the class-action settlement.

“At December 31, 2016, the Company had accrued $200,000 related to the settlement of a class action complaint. On January 7, 2017, BMG Rights Management (US) LLC (“BMG”) advanced the Company $200,000, which was used to pay off the settlement. The advance from BMG is to be applied to future billings from the Company to BMG for consulting services,” Rightscorp’s filing reads.

With Rightscorp’s future BMG revenue now being gobbled up by what appears to be loan repayments, it becomes difficult to see how the anti-piracy outfit can make enough money to pay off the $200,000 debt. However, its filing notes that on July 21, 2017, the company issued “an aggregate of 10,000,000 shares of common stock to an investor for a purchase price of $200,000.” While that amount matches the BMG debt, the filing doesn’t reveal who the investor is.

The filing also reveals that on July 31, Rightscorp entered into two agreements to provide services “to a holder of multiple copyrights.” The copyright holder isn’t named, but the deal reveals that it’s in Rightscorp’s best interests to get immediate payment from people to whom it sends cash settlement demands.

“[Rightscorp] will receive 50% of all gross proceeds of any settlement revenue received by the Client from pre-lawsuit ‘advisory notices,’ and 37.5% of all gross proceeds received by the Client from ‘final warning’ notices sent immediately prior to a lawsuit,” the filing notes.

Also of interest is that Rightscorp has offered not to work with any of the copyright holders’ direct competitors, providing certain thresholds are met – $10,000 revenue in the first month to $100,000 after 12 months. But there’s more to the deal.

Rightscorp will also provide a number of services to this client including detecting and verifying copyright works on P2P networks, providing information about infringers, plus reporting, litigation support, and copyright protection advisory services.

For this, Rightscorp will earn $10,000 for the first three months, rising to $85,000 per month after 16 months, valuable revenue for a company fighting for its life.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Analyzing AWS Cost and Usage Reports with Looker and Amazon Athena

Post Syndicated from Dillon Morrison original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/analyzing-aws-cost-and-usage-reports-with-looker-and-amazon-athena/

This is a guest post by Dillon Morrison at Looker. Looker is, in their own words, “a new kind of analytics platform–letting everyone in your business make better decisions by getting reliable answers from a tool they can use.” 

As the breadth of AWS products and services continues to grow, customers are able to more easily move their technology stack and core infrastructure to AWS. One of the attractive benefits of AWS is the cost savings. Rather than paying upfront capital expenses for large on-premises systems, customers can instead pay variables expenses for on-demand services. To further reduce expenses AWS users can reserve resources for specific periods of time, and automatically scale resources as needed.

The AWS Cost Explorer is great for aggregated reporting. However, conducting analysis on the raw data using the flexibility and power of SQL allows for much richer detail and insight, and can be the better choice for the long term. Thankfully, with the introduction of Amazon Athena, monitoring and managing these costs is now easier than ever.

In the post, I walk through setting up the data pipeline for cost and usage reports, Amazon S3, and Athena, and discuss some of the most common levers for cost savings. I surface tables through Looker, which comes with a host of pre-built data models and dashboards to make analysis of your cost and usage data simple and intuitive.

Analysis with Athena

With Athena, there’s no need to create hundreds of Excel reports, move data around, or deploy clusters to house and process data. Athena uses Apache Hive’s DDL to create tables, and the Presto querying engine to process queries. Analysis can be performed directly on raw data in S3. Conveniently, AWS exports raw cost and usage data directly into a user-specified S3 bucket, making it simple to start querying with Athena quickly. This makes continuous monitoring of costs virtually seamless, since there is no infrastructure to manage. Instead, users can leverage the power of the Athena SQL engine to easily perform ad-hoc analysis and data discovery without needing to set up a data warehouse.

After the data pipeline is established, cost and usage data (the recommended billing data, per AWS documentation) provides a plethora of comprehensive information around usage of AWS services and the associated costs. Whether you need the report segmented by product type, user identity, or region, this report can be cut-and-sliced any number of ways to properly allocate costs for any of your business needs. You can then drill into any specific line item to see even further detail, such as the selected operating system, tenancy, purchase option (on-demand, spot, or reserved), and so on.


By default, the Cost and Usage report exports CSV files, which you can compress using gzip (recommended for performance). There are some additional configuration options for tuning performance further, which are discussed below.


If you want to follow along, you need the following resources:

Enable the cost and usage reports

First, enable the Cost and Usage report. For Time unit, select Hourly. For Include, select Resource IDs. All options are prompted in the report-creation window.

The Cost and Usage report dumps CSV files into the specified S3 bucket. Please note that it can take up to 24 hours for the first file to be delivered after enabling the report.

Configure the S3 bucket and files for Athena querying

In addition to the CSV file, AWS also creates a JSON manifest file for each cost and usage report. Athena requires that all of the files in the S3 bucket are in the same format, so we need to get rid of all these manifest files. If you’re looking to get started with Athena quickly, you can simply go into your S3 bucket and delete the manifest file manually, skip the automation described below, and move on to the next section.

To automate the process of removing the manifest file each time a new report is dumped into S3, which I recommend as you scale, there are a few additional steps. The folks at Concurrency labs wrote a great overview and set of scripts for this, which you can find in their GitHub repo.

These scripts take the data from an input bucket, remove anything unnecessary, and dump it into a new output bucket. We can utilize AWS Lambda to trigger this process whenever new data is dropped into S3, or on a nightly basis, or whatever makes most sense for your use-case, depending on how often you’re querying the data. Please note that enabling the “hourly” report means that data is reported at the hour-level of granularity, not that a new file is generated every hour.

Following these scripts, you’ll notice that we’re adding a date partition field, which isn’t necessary but improves query performance. In addition, converting data from CSV to a columnar format like ORC or Parquet also improves performance. We can automate this process using Lambda whenever new data is dropped in our S3 bucket. Amazon Web Services discusses columnar conversion at length, and provides walkthrough examples, in their documentation.

As a long-term solution, best practice is to use compression, partitioning, and conversion. However, for purposes of this walkthrough, we’re not going to worry about them so we can get up-and-running quicker.

Set up the Athena query engine

In your AWS console, navigate to the Athena service, and click “Get Started”. Follow the tutorial and set up a new database (we’ve called ours “AWS Optimizer” in this example). Don’t worry about configuring your initial table, per the tutorial instructions. We’ll be creating a new table for cost and usage analysis. Once you walked through the tutorial steps, you’ll be able to access the Athena interface, and can begin running Hive DDL statements to create new tables.

One thing that’s important to note, is that the Cost and Usage CSVs also contain the column headers in their first row, meaning that the column headers would be included in the dataset and any queries. For testing and quick set-up, you can remove this line manually from your first few CSV files. Long-term, you’ll want to use a script to programmatically remove this row each time a new file is dropped in S3 (every few hours typically). We’ve drafted up a sample script for ease of reference, which we run on Lambda. We utilize Lambda’s native ability to invoke the script whenever a new object is dropped in S3.

For cost and usage, we recommend using the DDL statement below. Since our data is in CSV format, we don’t need to use a SerDe, we can simply specify the “separatorChar, quoteChar, and escapeChar”, and the structure of the files (“TEXTFILE”). Note that AWS does have an OpenCSV SerDe as well, if you prefer to use that.


identity_LineItemId String,
identity_TimeInterval String,
bill_InvoiceId String,
bill_BillingEntity String,
bill_BillType String,
bill_PayerAccountId String,
bill_BillingPeriodStartDate String,
bill_BillingPeriodEndDate String,
lineItem_UsageAccountId String,
lineItem_LineItemType String,
lineItem_UsageStartDate String,
lineItem_UsageEndDate String,
lineItem_ProductCode String,
lineItem_UsageType String,
lineItem_Operation String,
lineItem_AvailabilityZone String,
lineItem_ResourceId String,
lineItem_UsageAmount String,
lineItem_NormalizationFactor String,
lineItem_NormalizedUsageAmount String,
lineItem_CurrencyCode String,
lineItem_UnblendedRate String,
lineItem_UnblendedCost String,
lineItem_BlendedRate String,
lineItem_BlendedCost String,
lineItem_LineItemDescription String,
lineItem_TaxType String,
product_ProductName String,
product_accountAssistance String,
product_architecturalReview String,
product_architectureSupport String,
product_availability String,
product_bestPractices String,
product_cacheEngine String,
product_caseSeverityresponseTimes String,
product_clockSpeed String,
product_currentGeneration String,
product_customerServiceAndCommunities String,
product_databaseEdition String,
product_databaseEngine String,
product_dedicatedEbsThroughput String,
product_deploymentOption String,
product_description String,
product_durability String,
product_ebsOptimized String,
product_ecu String,
product_endpointType String,
product_engineCode String,
product_enhancedNetworkingSupported String,
product_executionFrequency String,
product_executionLocation String,
product_feeCode String,
product_feeDescription String,
product_freeQueryTypes String,
product_freeTrial String,
product_frequencyMode String,
product_fromLocation String,
product_fromLocationType String,
product_group String,
product_groupDescription String,
product_includedServices String,
product_instanceFamily String,
product_instanceType String,
product_io String,
product_launchSupport String,
product_licenseModel String,
product_location String,
product_locationType String,
product_maxIopsBurstPerformance String,
product_maxIopsvolume String,
product_maxThroughputvolume String,
product_maxVolumeSize String,
product_maximumStorageVolume String,
product_memory String,
product_messageDeliveryFrequency String,
product_messageDeliveryOrder String,
product_minVolumeSize String,
product_minimumStorageVolume String,
product_networkPerformance String,
product_operatingSystem String,
product_operation String,
product_operationsSupport String,
product_physicalProcessor String,
product_preInstalledSw String,
product_proactiveGuidance String,
product_processorArchitecture String,
product_processorFeatures String,
product_productFamily String,
product_programmaticCaseManagement String,
product_provisioned String,
product_queueType String,
product_requestDescription String,
product_requestType String,
product_routingTarget String,
product_routingType String,
product_servicecode String,
product_sku String,
product_softwareType String,
product_storage String,
product_storageClass String,
product_storageMedia String,
product_technicalSupport String,
product_tenancy String,
product_thirdpartySoftwareSupport String,
product_toLocation String,
product_toLocationType String,
product_training String,
product_transferType String,
product_usageFamily String,
product_usagetype String,
product_vcpu String,
product_version String,
product_volumeType String,
product_whoCanOpenCases String,
pricing_LeaseContractLength String,
pricing_OfferingClass String,
pricing_PurchaseOption String,
pricing_publicOnDemandCost String,
pricing_publicOnDemandRate String,
pricing_term String,
pricing_unit String,
reservation_AvailabilityZone String,
reservation_NormalizedUnitsPerReservation String,
reservation_NumberOfReservations String,
reservation_ReservationARN String,
reservation_TotalReservedNormalizedUnits String,
reservation_TotalReservedUnits String,
reservation_UnitsPerReservation String,
resourceTags_userName String,
resourceTags_usercostcategory String  

      ESCAPED BY '\\'

    LOCATION 's3://<<your bucket name>>';

Once you’ve successfully executed the command, you should see a new table named “cost_and_usage” with the below properties. Now we’re ready to start executing queries and running analysis!

Start with Looker and connect to Athena

Setting up Looker is a quick process, and you can try it out for free here (or download from Amazon Marketplace). It takes just a few seconds to connect Looker to your Athena database, and Looker comes with a host of pre-built data models and dashboards to make analysis of your cost and usage data simple and intuitive. After you’re connected, you can use the Looker UI to run whatever analysis you’d like. Looker translates this UI to optimized SQL, so any user can execute and visualize queries for true self-service analytics.

Major cost saving levers

Now that the data pipeline is configured, you can dive into the most popular use cases for cost savings. In this post, I focus on:

  • Purchasing Reserved Instances vs. On-Demand Instances
  • Data transfer costs
  • Allocating costs over users or other Attributes (denoted with resource tags)

On-Demand, Spot, and Reserved Instances

Purchasing Reserved Instances vs On-Demand Instances is arguably going to be the biggest cost lever for heavy AWS users (Reserved Instances run up to 75% cheaper!). AWS offers three options for purchasing instances:

  • On-Demand—Pay as you use.
  • Spot (variable cost)—Bid on spare Amazon EC2 computing capacity.
  • Reserved Instances—Pay for an instance for a specific, allotted period of time.

When purchasing a Reserved Instance, you can also choose to pay all-upfront, partial-upfront, or monthly. The more you pay upfront, the greater the discount.

If your company has been using AWS for some time now, you should have a good sense of your overall instance usage on a per-month or per-day basis. Rather than paying for these instances On-Demand, you should try to forecast the number of instances you’ll need, and reserve them with upfront payments.

The total amount of usage with Reserved Instances versus overall usage with all instances is called your coverage ratio. It’s important not to confuse your coverage ratio with your Reserved Instance utilization. Utilization represents the amount of reserved hours that were actually used. Don’t worry about exceeding capacity, you can still set up Auto Scaling preferences so that more instances get added whenever your coverage or utilization crosses a certain threshold (we often see a target of 80% for both coverage and utilization among savvy customers).

Calculating the reserved costs and coverage can be a bit tricky with the level of granularity provided by the cost and usage report. The following query shows your total cost over the last 6 months, broken out by Reserved Instance vs other instance usage. You can substitute the cost field for usage if you’d prefer. Please note that you should only have data for the time period after the cost and usage report has been enabled (though you can opt for up to 3 months of historical data by contacting your AWS Account Executive). If you’re just getting started, this query will only show a few days.


	DATE_FORMAT(from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate),'%Y-%m') AS "cost_and_usage.usage_start_month",
	COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost",
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'DiscountedUsage' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'RIFee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'Fee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         ELSE 'Non RI Line Item'
        END = 'RI Line Item') THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_reserved_unblended_cost",
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'DiscountedUsage' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'RIFee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'Fee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         ELSE 'Non RI Line Item'
        END = 'RI Line Item') THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0)) / NULLIF((COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0)),0)  AS "cost_and_usage.percent_spend_on_ris",
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'DiscountedUsage' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'RIFee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'Fee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         ELSE 'Non RI Line Item'
        END = 'Non RI Line Item') THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_non_reserved_unblended_cost",
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'DiscountedUsage' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'RIFee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'Fee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         ELSE 'Non RI Line Item'
        END = 'Non RI Line Item') THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0)) / NULLIF((COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0)),0)  AS "cost_and_usage.percent_spend_on_non_ris"
FROM aws_optimizer.cost_and_usage  AS cost_and_usage

	(((from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) >= ((DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))) AND (from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) < ((DATE_ADD('month', 6, DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))))))

The resulting table should look something like the image below (I’m surfacing tables through Looker, though the same table would result from querying via command line or any other interface).

With a BI tool, you can create dashboards for easy reference and monitoring. New data is dumped into S3 every few hours, so your dashboards can update several times per day.

It’s an iterative process to understand the appropriate number of Reserved Instances needed to meet your business needs. After you’ve properly integrated Reserved Instances into your purchasing patterns, the savings can be significant. If your coverage is consistently below 70%, you should seriously consider adjusting your purchase types and opting for more Reserved instances.

Data transfer costs

One of the great things about AWS data storage is that it’s incredibly cheap. Most charges often come from moving and processing that data. There are several different prices for transferring data, broken out largely by transfers between regions and availability zones. Transfers between regions are the most costly, followed by transfers between Availability Zones. Transfers within the same region and same availability zone are free unless using elastic or public IP addresses, in which case there is a cost. You can find more detailed information in the AWS Pricing Docs. With this in mind, there are several simple strategies for helping reduce costs.

First, since costs increase when transferring data between regions, it’s wise to ensure that as many services as possible reside within the same region. The more you can localize services to one specific region, the lower your costs will be.

Second, you should maximize the data you’re routing directly within AWS services and IP addresses. Transfers out to the open internet are the most costly and least performant mechanisms of data transfers, so it’s best to keep transfers within AWS services.

Lastly, data transfers between private IP addresses are cheaper than between elastic or public IP addresses, so utilizing private IP addresses as much as possible is the most cost-effective strategy.

The following query provides a table depicting the total costs for each AWS product, broken out transfer cost type. Substitute the “lineitem_productcode” field in the query to segment the costs by any other attribute. If you notice any unusually high spikes in cost, you’ll need to dig deeper to understand what’s driving that spike: location, volume, and so on. Drill down into specific costs by including “product_usagetype” and “product_transfertype” in your query to identify the types of transfer costs that are driving up your bill.

	cost_and_usage.lineitem_productcode  AS "cost_and_usage.product_code",
	COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost",
	COALESCE(SUM(CASE WHEN REGEXP_LIKE(cost_and_usage.product_usagetype, 'DataTransfer')    THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_data_transfer_cost",
	COALESCE(SUM(CASE WHEN REGEXP_LIKE(cost_and_usage.product_usagetype, 'DataTransfer-In')    THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_inbound_data_transfer_cost",
	COALESCE(SUM(CASE WHEN REGEXP_LIKE(cost_and_usage.product_usagetype, 'DataTransfer-Out')    THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_outbound_data_transfer_cost"
FROM aws_optimizer.cost_and_usage  AS cost_and_usage

	(((from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) >= ((DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))) AND (from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) < ((DATE_ADD('month', 6, DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))))))

When moving between regions or over the open web, many data transfer costs also include the origin and destination location of the data movement. Using a BI tool with mapping capabilities, you can get a nice visual of data flows. The point at the center of the map is used to represent external data flows over the open internet.

Analysis by tags

AWS provides the option to apply custom tags to individual resources, so you can allocate costs over whatever customized segment makes the most sense for your business. For a SaaS company that hosts software for customers on AWS, maybe you’d want to tag the size of each customer. The following query uses custom tags to display the reserved, data transfer, and total cost for each AWS service, broken out by tag categories, over the last 6 months. You’ll want to substitute the cost_and_usage.resourcetags_customersegment and cost_and_usage.customer_segment with the name of your customer field.


SELECT *, DENSE_RANK() OVER (ORDER BY z___min_rank) as z___pivot_row_rank, RANK() OVER (PARTITION BY z__pivot_col_rank ORDER BY z___min_rank) as z__pivot_col_ordering FROM (
SELECT *, MIN(z___rank) OVER (PARTITION BY "cost_and_usage.product_code") as z___min_rank FROM (
SELECT *, RANK() OVER (ORDER BY CASE WHEN z__pivot_col_rank=1 THEN (CASE WHEN "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost" IS NOT NULL THEN 0 ELSE 1 END) ELSE 2 END, CASE WHEN z__pivot_col_rank=1 THEN "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost" ELSE NULL END DESC, "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost" DESC, z__pivot_col_rank, "cost_and_usage.product_code") AS z___rank FROM (
SELECT *, DENSE_RANK() OVER (ORDER BY CASE WHEN "cost_and_usage.customer_segment" IS NULL THEN 1 ELSE 0 END, "cost_and_usage.customer_segment") AS z__pivot_col_rank FROM (
	cost_and_usage.lineitem_productcode  AS "cost_and_usage.product_code",
	cost_and_usage.resourcetags_customersegment  AS "cost_and_usage.customer_segment",
	COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0) AS "cost_and_usage.total_unblended_cost",
	1.0 * (COALESCE(SUM(CASE WHEN REGEXP_LIKE(cost_and_usage.product_usagetype, 'DataTransfer')    THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0)) / NULLIF((COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0)),0)  AS "cost_and_usage.percent_spend_data_transfers_unblended",
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'DiscountedUsage' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'RIFee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         WHEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_lineitemtype = 'Fee' THEN 'RI Line Item'
         ELSE 'Non RI Line Item'
        END = 'Non RI Line Item') THEN cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost  ELSE NULL END), 0)) / NULLIF((COALESCE(SUM(cost_and_usage.lineitem_unblendedcost ), 0)),0)  AS "cost_and_usage.unblended_percent_spend_on_ris"
FROM aws_optimizer.cost_and_usage_raw  AS cost_and_usage

	(((from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) >= ((DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))) AND (from_iso8601_timestamp(cost_and_usage.lineitem_usagestartdate)) < ((DATE_ADD('month', 6, DATE_ADD('month', -5, DATE_TRUNC('MONTH', CAST(NOW() AS DATE))))))))
GROUP BY 1,2) ww
) bb WHERE z__pivot_col_rank <= 16384
) aa
) xx
) zz
 WHERE z___pivot_row_rank <= 500 OR z__pivot_col_ordering = 1 ORDER BY z___pivot_row_rank

The resulting table in this example looks like the results below. In this example, you can tell that we’re making poor use of Reserved Instances because they represent such a small portion of our overall costs.

Again, using a BI tool to visualize these costs and trends over time makes the analysis much easier to consume and take action on.


Saving costs on your AWS spend is always an iterative, ongoing process. Hopefully with these queries alone, you can start to understand your spending patterns and identify opportunities for savings. However, this is just a peek into the many opportunities available through analysis of the Cost and Usage report. Each company is different, with unique needs and usage patterns. To achieve maximum cost savings, we encourage you to set up an analytics environment that enables your team to explore all potential cuts and slices of your usage data, whenever it’s necessary. Exploring different trends and spikes across regions, services, user types, etc. helps you gain comprehensive understanding of your major cost levers and consistently implement new cost reduction strategies.

Note that all of the queries and analysis provided in this post were generated using the Looker data platform. If you’re already a Looker customer, you can get all of this analysis, additional pre-configured dashboards, and much more using Looker Blocks for AWS.

About the Author

Dillon Morrison leads the Platform Ecosystem at Looker. He enjoys exploring new technologies and architecting the most efficient data solutions for the business needs of his company and their customers. In his spare time, you’ll find Dillon rock climbing in the Bay Area or nose deep in the docs of the latest AWS product release at his favorite cafe (“Arlequin in SF is unbeatable!”).




Spinrilla Refuses to Share Its Source Code With the RIAA

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/spinrilla-refuses-to-share-its-source-code-with-the-riaa-170815/

Earlier this year, a group of well-known labels targeted Spinrilla, a popular hip-hop mixtape site and accompanying app with millions of users.

The coalition of record labels including Sony Music, Warner Bros. Records, and Universal Music Group, filed a lawsuit accusing the service of alleged copyright infringements.

Both sides have started the discovery process and recently asked the court to rule on several unresolved matters. The parties begin with their statements of facts, clearly from opposite angles.

The RIAA remains confident that the mixtape site is ripping off music creators and wants its operators to be held accountable.

“Since Spinrilla launched, Defendants have facilitated millions of unauthorized downloads and streams of thousands of Plaintiffs’ sound recordings without Plaintiffs’ permission,” RIAA writes, complaining about “rampant” infringement on the site.

However, Spinrilla itself believes that the claims are overblown. The company points out that the RIAA’s complaint only lists a tiny fraction of all the songs uploaded by its users. These somehow slipped through its Audible Magic anti-piracy filter.

Where the RIAA paints a picture of rampant copyright infringement, the mixtape site stresses that the record labels are complaining about less than 0.001% of all the tracks they ever published.

“From 2013 to the present, Spinrilla users have uploaded about 1 million songs to Spinrilla’s servers and Spinrilla published about 850,000 of those. Plaintiffs are complaining that 210 of those songs are owned by them and published on Spinrilla without permission,” Spinrilla’s lawyers write.

“That means that Plaintiffs make no claim to 99.9998% of the songs on Spinrilla. Plaintiffs’ shouting of ‘rampant infringement on Spinrilla’, an accusation that Spinrilla was designed to allow easy and open access to infringing material, and assertion that ‘Defendants have facilitated millions of unauthorized downloads’ of those 210 songs is untrue – it is nothing more than a wish and a dream.”

The company reiterates that it’s a platform for independent musicians and that it doesn’t want to feature the Eminem’s and Bieber’s of this world, especially not without permission.

As for the discovery process, there are still several outstanding issues they need the Court’s advice on. Spinrilla has thus far produced 12,000 pages of documents and answered all RIAA interrogatories, but refuses to hand over certain information, including its source code.

According to Spinrilla, there is no reason for the RIAA to have access to its “crown jewel.”

“The source code is the crown jewel of any software based business, including Spinrilla. Even worse, Plaintiffs want an ‘executable’ version of Spinrilla’s source code, which would literally enable them to replicate Spinrilla’s entire website. Any Plaintiff could, in hours, delete all references to ‘Spinrilla,’ add its own brand and launch Spinrilla’s exact website.

“If we sued YouTube for hosting 210 infringing videos, would I be entitled to the source code for YouTube? There is simply no justification for Spinrilla sharing its source code with Plaintiffs,” Spinrilla adds.

The RIAA, on the other hand, argues that the source code will provide insight into several critical issues, including Spinrilla’s knowledge about infringing activity and its ability to terminate repeat copyright infringers.

In addition to the source code, the RIAA has also requested detailed information about the site’s users, including their download and streaming history. This request is too broad, the mixtape site argues, and has offered to provide information on the uploaders of the 210 infringing tracks instead.

It’s clear that the RIAA and Spinrilla disagree on various fronts and it will be up to the court to decide what information must be handed over. So far, however, the language used clearly shows that both parties are far from reaching some kind of compromise.

The first joint discovery statement is available in full here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Wanted: Front End Developer

Post Syndicated from Yev original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wanted-front-end-developer/

Want to work at a company that helps customers in over 150 countries around the world protect the memories they hold dear? Do you want to challenge yourself with a business that serves consumers, SMBs, Enterprise, and developers? If all that sounds interesting, you might be interested to know that Backblaze is looking for a Front End Developer​!

Backblaze is a 10 year old company. Providing great customer experiences is the “secret sauce” that enables us to successfully compete against some of technology’s giants. We’ll finish the year at ~$20MM ARR and are a profitable business. This is an opportunity to have your work shine at scale in one of the fastest growing verticals in tech – Cloud Storage.

You will utilize HTML, ReactJS, CSS and jQuery to develop intuitive, elegant user experiences. As a member of our Front End Dev team, you will work closely with our web development, software design, and marketing teams.

On a day to day basis, you must be able to convert image mockups to HTML or ReactJS – There’s some production work that needs to get done. But you will also be responsible for helping build out new features, rethink old processes, and enabling third party systems to empower our marketing/sales/ and support teams.

Our Front End Developer must be proficient in:

  • HTML, ReactJS
  • UTF-8, Java Properties, and Localized HTML (Backblaze runs in 11 languages!)
  • JavaScript, CSS, Ajax
  • jQuery, Bootstrap
  • Understanding of cross-browser compatibility issues and ways to work around them
  • Basic SEO principles and ensuring that applications will adhere to them
  • Learning about third party marketing and sales tools through reading documentation. Our systems include Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Salesforce, and Hubspot

Struts, Java, JSP, Servlet and Apache Tomcat are a plus, but not required.

We’re looking for someone that is:

  • Passionate about building friendly, easy to use Interfaces and APIs.
  • Likes to work closely with other engineers, support, and marketing to help customers.
  • Is comfortable working independently on a mutually agreed upon prioritization queue (we don’t micromanage, we do make sure tasks are reasonably defined and scoped).
  • Diligent with quality control. Backblaze prides itself on giving our team autonomy to get work done, do the right thing for our customers, and keep a pace that is sustainable over the long run. As such, we expect everyone that checks in code that is stable. We also have a small QA team that operates as a secondary check when needed.

Backblaze Employees Have:

  • Good attitude and willingness to do whatever it takes to get the job done
  • Strong desire to work for a small fast, paced company
  • Desire to learn and adapt to rapidly changing technologies and work environment
  • Comfort with well behaved pets in the office

This position is located in San Mateo, California. Regular attendance in the office is expected. Backblaze is an Equal Opportunity Employer and we offer competitive salary and benefits, including our no policy vacation policy.

If this sounds like you
Send an email to [email protected] with:

  1. Front End Dev​ in the subject line
  2. Your resume attached
  3. An overview of your relevant experience

The post Wanted: Front End Developer appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

BREIN is Taking Infamous ‘Piracy’ Hosting Provider Ecatel to Court

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/brein-is-taking-infamous-piracy-hosting-provider-ecatel-to-court-170815/

A regular website can be easily hosted in most countries of the world but when the nature of the project begins to step on toes, opportunities begin to reduce. Openly hosting The Pirate Bay, for example, is something few providers want to get involved with.

There are, however, providers out there who specialize in hosting services that others won’t touch. They develop a reputation of turning a blind eye to their customers’ activities, only reacting when a crisis looms on the horizon. Despite the problems, there are a few that are surprisingly resilient.

One such host is Netherlands-based Ecatel, which has hit the headlines many times over the years for allegedly having customers involved in warez, torrents, and streaming, not to mention spam and malware. For hosting the former group, it’s now in the crosshairs of Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN.

According to an application for a witness hearing filed with The Court of the Hague by BREIN, Ecatel has repeatedly hosted websites dealing in infringing content over recent years. While this is nothing particularly out of the ordinary, BREIN claims that complaints filed against the sites were dealt with slowly by Ecatel or not at all.

Ecatel Ltd is a company incorporated in the UK with servers in the Netherlands but since 2015, another hosting company called Novogara has appeared in tandem. Court documents suggest that Novogara is associated with Ecatel, something that was confirmed early 2016 in an email sent out by Ecatel itself.

“We’d like to inform you that all services of Ecatel Ltd are taken over by a new brand called Novogara Ltd with immediate effect. The take-over includes Ecatel and all her subsidiaries,” the email read.

Muddying the waters a little more, in 2015 Ecatel’s IP addresses were apparently taken over by Quasi Networks Ltd, a Seychelles-based company whose business is described locally as being conducted entirely overseas.

“Stichting BREIN has found several websites in the network of Quasi Networks with obviously infringing content. Quasi Networks, however, does not respond structurally to requests for closing those websites. This involves unlawful acts against the parties associated with the BREIN Foundation,” a ruling from the Court reads.

As a result, BREIN wants a witness hearing with three defendants connected to the Ecatel/Novgara/Quasi group of companies in order to establish the relationship between the businesses, where their servers are, and who is behind Quasi Networks.

“Stichting BREIN is interested in this information in order to be able to judge who it can appeal to and whether it is useful to start a legal procedure,” the Court adds.

Two of the defendants failed to lodge a defense against BREIN’s application but one objected to the request for a hearing. He said that since Quasi Networks, Ecatel and Novogara are all incorporated outside the Netherlands, a trial must also be conducted abroad and therefore a Dutch judge would not have jurisdiction.

He also argued that BREIN would use the witness hearing as a “fishing expedition” in order to gather information it currently does not have, in order to formulate some kind of case against the defendants, in one way or another.

In a decision published this week, The Court of the Hague rejected that argument, noting that the basis for the claim is copyright infringement through Netherlands-hosted websites. Furthermore, the majority of the witnesses are resident in the district of The Hague. It also underlined the importance of a hearing.

“The request for holding a preliminary witness hearing opens an independent petition procedure, which does not address the eligibility of any claim that may be lodged. An investigation must be made by the judge who has to deal with and decide the main case – if it comes.

“The court points out that a preliminary witness hearing is now (partly) necessary to clarify whether and to what extent a claim has any chance of success,” the decision reads.

According to documents published by Companies House in the UK, Ecatel Ltd ceased to exist this morning, having been dissolved at the request of its directors.

The hearing of the witnesses is set to take place on Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 9.30 in the Palace of Justice at Prince Claus 60 in The Hague.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

MPAA Revenue Stabilizes, Chris Dodd Earns $3.5 Million

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-revenue-stabilizes-chris-dodd-earns-3-5-million170813/

Protecting the interests of Hollywood, the MPAA has been heavily involved in numerous anti-piracy efforts around the world in recent years.

Through its involvement in the shutdowns of Popcorn Time, YIFY, isoHunt, Hotfile, Megaupload and several other platforms, the MPAA has worked hard to target piracy around the globe.

Perhaps just as importantly, the group lobbies lawmakers globally while managing anti-piracy campaigns both in and outside the US, including the Creative Content UK program.

All this work doesn’t come for free, obviously, so the MPAA relies on six major movie studios for financial support. After its revenues plummeted a few years ago, they have steadily recovered and according to its latest tax filing, the MPAA’s total income is now over $72 million.

The IRS filing, covering the fiscal year 2015, reveals that the movie studios contributed $65 million, the same as a year earlier. Overall revenue has stabilized as well, after a few years of modest growth.

Going over the numbers, we see that salaries make up a large chunk of the expenses. Former Senator Chris Dodd, the MPAA’s Chairman and CEO, is the highest paid employee with a total income of more than $3.5 million, including a $250,000 bonus.

It was recently announced that Dodd will leave the MPAA next month. He will be replaced by Charles Rivkin, another political heavyweight. Rivkin previously served as Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs in the Obama administration.

In addition to Dodd, there are two other employees who made over a million in 2015, Global General Counsel Steve Fabrizio and Diane Strahan, the MPAA’s Chief Operating Officer.

Looking at some of the other expenses we see that the MPAA’s lobbying budget remained stable at $4.2 million. Another $4.4 million went to various grants, while legal costs totaled $7.2 million that year.

More than two million dollars worth of legal expenses were paid to the US law firm Jenner & Block, which represented the movie studios in various court cases. In addition, the MPAA paid more than $800,000 to the UK law firm Wiggin, which assisted the group in local site-blocking efforts.

Finally, it’s worth looking at the various gifts and grants the MPAA hands out. As reported last year, the group handsomely contributes to various research projects. This includes a recurring million dollar grant for Carnegie Mellon’s ‘Initiative for Digital Entertainment Analytics’ (IDEA), which researches various piracy related topics.

IDEA co-director Rahul Telang previously informed us that the gift is used to hire researchers and pay for research materials. It is not tied to a particular project.

We also see $70,000+ in donations for both the Democratic and Republican Attorneys General associations. The purpose of the grants is listed as “general support.” Interestingly, just recently over a dozen Attorneys General released a public service announcement warning the public to stay away from pirate sites.

These type of donations and grants are nothing new and are a regular part of business across many industries. Still, they are worth keeping in mind.

It will be interesting to see which direction the MPAA takes in the years to come. Under Chris Dodd it has booked a few notable successes, but there is still a long way to go before the piracy situation is somewhat under control.

MPAA’s full form 990 was published in Guidestar recently and a copy is available here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

DMCA Used to Remove Ad Server URL From Easylist Ad Blocklist

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-used-to-remove-ad-server-url-from-easylist-ad-blocklist-170811/

The default business model on the Internet is “free” for consumers. Users largely expect websites to load without paying a dime but of course, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. To this end, millions of websites are funded by advertising revenue.

Sensible sites ensure that any advertising displayed is unobtrusive to the visitor but lots seem to think that bombarding users with endless ads, popups, and other hindrances is the best way to do business. As a result, ad blockers are now deployed by millions of people online.

In order to function, ad-blocking tools – such as uBlock Origin or Adblock – utilize lists of advertising domains compiled by third parties. One of the most popular is Easylist, which is distributed by authors fanboy, MonztA, Famlam, and Khrinunder, under dual Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike and GNU General Public Licenses.

With the freedom afforded by those licenses, copyright tends not to figure high on the agenda for Easylist. However, a legal problem that has just raised its head is causing serious concern among those in the ad-blocking community.

Two days ago a somewhat unusual commit appeared in the Easylist repo on Github. As shown in the image below, a domain URL previously added to Easylist had been removed following a DMCA takedown notice filed with Github.

Domain text taken down by DMCA?

The DMCA notice in question has not yet been published but it’s clear that it targets the domain ‘functionalclam.com’. A user called ‘ameshkov’ helpfully points out a post by a new Github user called ‘DMCAHelper’ which coincided with the start of the takedown process more than three weeks ago.

A domain in a list circumvents copyright controls?

Aside from the curious claims of a URL “circumventing copyright access controls” (domains themselves cannot be copyrighted), the big questions are (i) who filed the complaint and (ii) who operates Functionalclam.com? The domain WHOIS is hidden but according to a helpful sleuth on Github, it’s operated by anti ad-blocking company Admiral.

Ad-blocking means money down the drain….

If that is indeed the case, we have the intriguing prospect of a startup attempting to protect its business model by using a novel interpretation of copyright law to have a domain name removed from a list. How this will pan out is unclear but a notice recently published on Functionalclam.com suggests the route the company wishes to take.

“This domain is used by digital publishers to control access to copyrighted content in accordance with the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and understand how visitors are accessing their copyrighted content,” the notice begins.

Combined with the comments by DMCAHelper on Github, this statement suggests that the complainants believe that interference with the ad display process (ads themselves could be the “copyrighted content” in question) represents a breach of section 1201 of the DMCA.

If it does, that could have huge consequences for online advertising but we will need to see the original DMCA notice to have a clearer idea of what this is all about. Thus far, Github hasn’t published it but already interest is growing. A representative from the EFF has already contacted the Easylist team, so this battle could heat up pretty quickly.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Deploy a Data Warehouse Quickly with Amazon Redshift, Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL and Tableau Server

Post Syndicated from Jorge A. Lopez original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/deploy-a-data-warehouse-quickly-with-amazon-redshift-amazon-rds-for-postgresql-and-tableau-server/

One of the benefits of a data warehouse environment using both Amazon Redshift and Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL is that you can leverage the advantages of each service. Amazon Redshift is a high performance, petabyte-scale data warehouse service optimized for the online analytical processing (OLAP) queries typical of analytic reporting and business intelligence applications. On the other hand, a service like RDS excels at transactional OLTP workloads such as inserting, deleting, or updating rows.

In the recent JOIN Amazon Redshift AND Amazon RDS PostgreSQL WITH dblink post, we showed how you can deploy such an environment. Now, you can deploy a similar architecture using the Modern Data Warehouse on AWS Quick Start. The Quick Start is an automated deployment that uses AWS CloudFormation templates to launch, configure, and run the services required to deploy a data warehousing environment on AWS, based on Amazon Redshift and RDS for PostgreSQL.

The Quick Start also includes an instance of Tableau Server, running on Amazon EC2. This gives you the ability to host and serve analytic dashboards, workbooks and visualizations, supported by a trial license. You can play with the sample data source and dashboard, or create your own analyses by uploading your own data sets.

For more information about the Modern Data Warehouse on AWS Quick Start, download the full deployment guide. If you’re ready to get started, use one of the buttons below:

Option 1: Deploy Quick Start into a new VPC on AWS

Option 2: Deploy Quick Start into an existing VPC

If you have questions, please leave a comment below.

Next Steps

You can also join us for the webinar Unlock Insights and Reduce Costs by Modernizing Your Data Warehouse on AWS on Tuesday, August 22, 2017. Pearson, the education and publishing company, will present best practices and lessons learned during their journey to Amazon Redshift and Tableau.

Disney Ditching Netflix Keeps Piracy Relevant

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/disney-ditching-netflix-keeps-piracy-relevant-170809/

There is little doubt that, in the United States, Netflix has become the standard for watching movies on the Internet.

The subscription service is responsible for a third of all Internet traffic during peak hours, dwarfing that of online piracy and other legal video platforms.

It’s safe to assume that Netflix-type streaming services are among the best and most convenient alternative to piracy at this point. There is a problem though. The whole appeal of the streaming model becomes diluted when there are too many ‘Netflixes.’

Yesterday, Disney announced that it will end its partnership with Netflix in 2019. The company is working on its own Disney-branded movie streaming platforms, where titles such as Frozen 2 and Toy Story 4 will end up in the future.

Disney titles are among the most-watched content on Netflix, and the company’s stock took a hit when the news came out. In a statement late yesterday, Disney CEO Bob noted that the company has a good relationship with Netflix but the companies will part ways at the end of next year.

At the moment no decision has been made on what happens to Lucasfilm and Marvel films, but these could find a new home as well. Marvel TV shows such as Jessica Jones and Luke Cage will reportedly stay at Netflix

Although Disney’s decision may be good for Disney, a lot of Netflix users are not going to be happy. It likely means that they need another streaming platform subscription to get what they want, which isn’t a very positive prospect.

In piracy discussions, Hollywood insiders often stress that people have no reason to pirate, as pretty much all titles are available online legally. What they don’t mention, however, is that users need access to a few dozen paid services, to access them all.

In a way, this fragmentation is keeping the pirate ecosystems intact. While legal streaming services work just fine, having dozens of subscriptions is expensive, and not very practical. Especially not compared to pirate streaming sites, where everything can be accessed on the same site.

The music business has a better model, or had initially. Services such as Spotify allowed fans to access most popular music in one place, although that’s starting to crumble as well, due to exclusive deals and more fragmentation.

Admittedly, for a no-name observer, it’s easy to criticize and point fingers. The TV and movie business is built on complicated licensing deals, where a single Netflix may not be able to generate enough revenue for an entire industry.

But there has to be a better way than simply adding more streaming platforms, one would think?

Instead of solely trying to stamp down on pirate sites, it might be a good idea to take a careful look at the supply side as well. At the moment, fragmentation is keeping pirate sites relevant.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Getting Your Data into the Cloud is Just the Beginning

Post Syndicated from Andy Klein original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/cost-data-of-transfer-cloud-storage/

Total Cloud Storage Cost

Organizations should consider not just the cost of getting their data into the cloud, but also long-term costs for storage and retrieval when deciding which cloud storage solution meets their needs.

As cloud storage has become ubiquitous, organizations large and small are joining in. For larger organizations the lure of reducing capital expenses and their associated operational costs is enticing. For smaller organizations, cloud storage often replaces an unmanageable closet full of external hard drives, thumb drives, SD cards, and other devices. With terabytes or even petabytes of data, the common challenge facing organizations, large and small, is how to get their data up to the cloud.

Transferring Data to the Cloud

The obvious solution for getting your data to the cloud is to upload your data from your internal network through the internet to the cloud storage vendor you’ve selected. Cloud storage vendors don’t charge you for uploading your data to their cloud, but you, of course, have to pay your network provider and that’s where things start to get interesting. Here are a few things to consider.

  • The initial upload: Unless you are just starting out, you will have a large amount of data you want to upload to the cloud. This could be data you wish to archive or have had archived previously, for example data stored on LTO tapes or kept stored on external hard drives.
  • Pipe size: This is the amount of upload bandwidth of your network connection. This is measured in Mbps (megabits per second). Remember, your data is stored in MB (megabytes), so an upload connection of 80 Mbps will transfer no more than 10 MB of data per second and most likely a lot less.
  • Cost and caps: In some places, organizations pay a flat monthly rate for a specified level of service (speed) for internet access. In other locations, internet access is metered, or pay as you go. In either case, there can be internet service caps that limit or completely stop data transfer once you reach your contracted threshold.

One or more of these challenges has the potential to make the initial upload of your data expensive and potentially impossible. You could wait until cloud storage companies start buying up internet providers and make data upload cheap (or free with Amazon Prime!), but there is another option.

Data Transfer Devices

Given the potential challenges of using your network for the initial upload of your data to the cloud, a handful of cloud storage companies have introduced data transfer or data ingest services. Backblaze has the B2 Fireball, Amazon has Snowball (and other similar devices), and Google recently introduced their Transfer Appliance.

KLRU-TV Austin PBS uploaded their Austin City Limits musical anthology series to Backblaze using a B2 Fireball.

These services work as follows:

  • The provider sends you a portable (or somewhat portable) storage device.
  • You connect the device to your network and load some amount of data on the device over your internal network connection.
  • You return the device, loaded with your data, to the provider, who uploads your data to your cloud storage account from inside their own data center.

Data Transfer Devices Save Time

Assuming your Internet connection is a flat rate service that has no caps or limits and your organizational operations can withstand the traffic, you still may want to opt to use a data transfer service to move your data to the cloud. Why? Time. For example, if your initial data upload is 100 TB here’s how long it would take using different network upload connection speeds:

Network Speed Upload Time
10 Mbps 3 years
100 Mbps 124 days
500 Mbps 25 days
1 Gbps 12 days

This assumes you are using most of your upload connection to upload your data, which is probably not realistic if you want to stay in business. You could potentially rent a better connection or upgrade your connection permanently, both of which add to the cost of running your business.

Speaking of cost, there is of course a charge for the data transfer service that can be summarized as follows:

  • Backblaze B2 Fireball — Up to 40 TB of data per trip for $550.00 for 30 days in use at your site.
  • Amazon Snowball — up to 50 TB of data per trip for $200.00 for 10 days use at your site, plus $15/day each day in use at your site thereafter.
  • Google Transfer Appliance — up to 100 TB of data per trip for $300.00 for 10 days use at your site, plus $10/day each day in use at your site thereafter.

These prices do not include shipping, which can range from $100 to $900 depending on shipping method, location, etc.

Both Amazon and Google have transfer devices that are larger and cost more. For comparison purposes below we’ll use the three device versions listed above.

The Real Cost of Uploading Your Data

If we stopped our review at the previous paragraph and we were prepared to load up our transfer device in 10 days or less, the clear winner would be Google. But, this leaves out two very important components of any cloud storage project; the cost of storing your data and the cost of downloading your data.

Let’s look at two examples:

Example 1 — Archive 100 TB of data:

  • Use the data transfer service move 100 TB of data to the cloud storage service.
  • Accomplish the transfer within 10 days.
  • Store that 100 TB of data for 1 year.
Service Transfer Cost Cloud Storage Total
Backblaze B2 $1,650 (3 trips) $6,000 $7,650
Google Cloud $300 (1 trip) $24,000 $24,300
Amazon S3 $400 (2 trips) $25,200 $25,600


  • Using the B2 Fireball to store data in Backblaze B2 saves you $16,650 over a one-year period versus the Google solution.
  • The payback period for using a Backblaze B2 FireBall versus a Google Transfer Appliance is less than 1 month.

Example 2 — Store and use 100 TB of data:

  • Use the data transfer service to move 100 TB of data to the cloud storage service.
  • Accomplish the transfer within 10 days.
  • Store that 100 TB of data for 1 year.
  • Add 5 TB a month (on average) to the total stored.
  • Delete 2 TB a month (on average) from the total stored.
  • Download 10 TB a month (on average) from the total stored.
Service Transfer Cost Cloud Storage Total
Backblaze B2 $1,650 (3 trips) $9,570 $11,220
Google Cloud $300 (1 trip) $39,684 $39,984
Amazon S3 $400 (2 trips) $36,114 $36,514


  • Using the B2 Fireball to store data in Backblaze B2 saves you $28,764 over a one-year period versus the Google solution.
  • The payback period for using a Backblaze B2 FireBall versus a Google Transfer Appliance is less than 1 month.


  • All prices listed are based on list prices from the vendor websites as of the date of this blog post.
  • We are accomplishing the transfer of your data to the device within the 10 day “free” period specified by Amazon and Google.
  • We are comparing cloud storage services that have similar performance. For example, once the data is uploaded, it is readily available for download. The data is also available for access via a Web GUI, CLI, API, and/or various applications integrated with the cloud storage service. Multiple versions of files can be kept as desired. Files can be deleted any time.

To be fair, it requires Backblaze three trips to move 100 TB while it only takes 1 trip for the Google Transfer Appliance. This adds some cost to prepare, monitor, and ship three B2 Fireballs versus one Transfer Appliance. Even with that added cost, the Backblaze B2 solution will still be significantly less expensive over the one year period and beyond.

Have a Data Transfer Device Owner

Before you run out and order a transfer device, make sure the transfer process is someone’s job once the device arrives at your organization. Filling a transfer device should only take a few days, but if it is forgotten, you’ll find you’ve had the device for 2 or 3 weeks. While that’s not much of a problem with a B2 Fireball, it could start to get expensive otherwise.

Just the Beginning

As with most “new” technologies and services, you can expect other companies to jump in and provide various data ingest services. The cost will get cheaper or even free as cloud storage companies race to capture and lock up the data you have kept locally all these years. When you are evaluating cloud storage solutions, it’s best to look past the data ingest loss-leader price, and spend a few minutes to calculate the long-term cost of storing and using your data.

The post Getting Your Data into the Cloud is Just the Beginning appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

Approved Reseller programme launch PLUS more Pi Zero resellers

Post Syndicated from Mike Buffham original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/approved-reseller/

Ever since the launch of the first Raspberry Pi back in 2012, one thing that has been critical to us is to make our products easy to buy in as many countries as possible.

Buying a Raspberry Pi is certainly much simpler nowadays than it was when we were just starting out. Nevertheless, we want to go even further, and so today we are introducing an Approved Reseller programme. With this programme, we aim to recognise those resellers that represent Raspberry Pi products well, and make purchasing them easy for their customers.

The Raspberry Pi Approved Reseller programme

We’re launching the programme in eleven countries today: the UK, Ireland, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Greece and South Africa. Over the next few weeks, you will see us expand it to at least 50 countries.

We will link to the Approved Resellers’ websites directly from our Products page via the “Buy now” button. For customers who want to buy for business applications we have also added a “Buy for business” button. After clicking it, you will be able to select your country from a drop down menu. Doing so will link you directly to the local websites of our two licensed partners, Premier Farnell and Electrocomponents.

Our newest Raspberry Pi Zero resellers

On top of this we are also adding 6 new Raspberry Pi Zero resellers, giving 13 countries direct access to the Raspberry Pi Zero for the first time. We are particularly excited that these countries include Brazil and India, since they both have proved difficult to supply in the past.

The full list of new resellers is:

Hong Kong and China


Raspberry Pi Brazil


Raspberry Pi India

Czech Republic and Slovakia

Raspberry Pi Czech Republic and Slovakia

Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina

Raspberry Pi Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia

Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary

Raspberry Pi Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary


Raspberry Pi Mexico

The post Approved Reseller programme launch PLUS more Pi Zero resellers appeared first on Raspberry Pi.