back to article The wrong guy: Backup outfit Spanning deleted my personal data, claims Cohesity field CTO

Cohesity field CTO Chris Colotti has said that Kaseya Spanning eradicated years of backup data belonging to him after he unwittingly breached a usage limit for an account that was supposed to have no pre-set limits, and then didn't upgrade his plan within a five-day period. Writing yesterday in his personal blog, Colotti …

  1. This post has been deleted by its author

  2. alain williams Silver badge

    If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

    This time is was Kaseya being arse holes, next time it could be some malfunction, either way Kayeya are unlikely to worry much. How much work would you do for $48/year ?

    The only way of being safe is to take your own backup, preferably two that you keep in different locations.

    Yes: it is harder, more work, needs thought - but how much is your data worth to you ?

    1. gnasher729 Silver badge

      Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

      I still wait for someone creating a “neighbour” based system. Both you and your neighbour buy in, then each has one backup in their home and one in the other home. Save as long as both homes don’t burn down at the same time.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        "I still wait for someone creating a “neighbour” based system. Both you and your neighbour buy in, then each has one backup in their home and one in the other home."

        I think crashplan used to offer that model. The backups were even encrypted. I liked their service until they dumped us home users out in the cold.

        1. AOD

          Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

          Yes Crashplan for home users *used* to be good.

          Peer to peer backups were available in addition to storing in their cloud (unlimited for a price).

          The peer to peer stuff could even handle making the initial backup to a storage device locally (eg at full speed), detaching it and giving it to your neighbour, family member etc and from that point on it only had to transmit the deltas via the Internet which made things a lot more viable.

          The NAS versions took a bit of tinkering to get working but I ran a setup for several years until they gave home users the old Spanish archer.

      2. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        Some NAS systems support this. The problem, right now, is finding a neighbor with adequate internet bandwidth and a working WAN address to reach. 'Merica still has mostly antiquated Internet. IPv4 with NAT, 0.1 to 10 Mbps up, and monthly usage limits.

        1. Getmo

          Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

          Business users too. Back as a networking tech we were on the phone with customer's ISP trying to negotiate symmetrical speeds. They simply didn't offer it. Customer had 100 down/10 up, would've even taken 50/50 Mbps. But just to get better upload speeds, they said the only plans available were 300 down/25 up, or 1 gigabit down/50 up, for 2X or 3X current bill. Arizona.

      3. The Basis of everything is...

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        if you read El Reg then you should be able to work this out for yourself. Just to kick off an idea:

        Raspberry Pi 2B or later with Ubuntu for you plus friend with Bacula configured to either

        a) Backup locally (with encryption) and then sync the backup files to friend via rsync, syncthing etc

        b) Backup (with encryption) direct to friends Bacula Pi.

        Friend does likewise to back to you. Encryption means friend doesn't need to be trusted not to look at your stuff.

        Yes, you'll need enough disk at each end for each others data (or both if you use the first approach), but disks are cheap and for a domestic setup how many people genuinely need a working backup set of more than a few hundred GB of stuff? When you get more then 5 GB of anything you want to keep forever such as photos etc, burn to a DVD. 2 copies of course.

        I have one half of the above setup to back up data to a pair of 1TB USB disks - full data once a week, incremental data every night, OS backups every so often. 1 disk is in the house being used, other in the garage just in case something bad happens in the house. Swap over once a week. Only had to do a restore once so far, and for that my most important user was extremely grateful....

        There's gotta be many other ways you can do this. And not a cloud in sight.

        1. TReko

          Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

          And you can use tools like SyncDocs to backup your entire Google cloud to local storage on your PC or server.

          Feel free to use the cloud, but keep a local copy for safety.

      4. Graham 32

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        Symform used to do that. Then Quantum bought them and shut it down. Seems there's the generic term for this tech: cooperative storage cloud

      5. Rtbcomp

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        "Save as long as both homes don’t burn down at the same time." Having just spent ages watching American house fires on YouTube there is a distinct possibility that if your house burns down, your neighbour's will too.

    2. Cynic_999

      Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

      For less than twice the cost of 1 year's subscription, you can buy a 1TB portable HDD. This will back up 10GB of data per month for more than 8 years. If it is only powered up when you backup or restore data, it is likely to be more reliable than an online backup service - as well as being a heck of a lot faster.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        For less than twice the cost of 1 year's subscription, you can buy a 1TB portable HDD

        That's a very impressive compression ratio if you can squeeze 36TB of mostly compressed data onto a 1TB HDD...

      2. NorthIowan

        Re: buy a 1TB portable

        Plan on buying at least 2 or 3. One can fail and you are out of luck if you find out after your PC dies to.

        And you need to take a copy off site from time to time.

        Houses can burn down, get hit my lightning or be damaged by storms.

        Or even hit by a car. Saw the video of that a few years back. Car hit the second floor. The house was on flat ground. But the divide road by it had a curb and the car was going way too fast.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

      Yes: it is harder, more work, needs thought - but how much is your data worth to you ?

      Agreed. I wonder if his data was worth more than the £1500 to £2000 a 48TB NAS would have cost him (36TB plus parity data.) I guess he knows now...

    4. Mike Lewis

      Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

      I've always followed the policy that backups are not done unless I do them myself. I once returned from a hoilday to find that the sysadmin had reformatted my hard drive and deleted the backups because he thought I had left the company. Fortunately, I had my own backups on computers in other cities that he didn't know about.

      1. Captain Scarlet Silver badge

        Re: If you cannot touch it do not complain when it evaporates

        Are you sure he isn't your secret nemesis?

  3. Spiz

    I sympathise with the guy because that EULA isn't worth the ASCII it's written in, but at the same time if you want to be absolutely sure you've got your data, back it up yourself on your own hardware!

  4. Adelio Silver badge

    Here, here, cloud backups, if used at all should be third or fourth in line for backups to do.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not sure I would use the Cloud for backups - just as a way to transfer my data from one place to another.

      The Cloud - your data on someone else's computer

    2. Terry 6 Silver badge

      Exactly, my important home stuff is backed up on my own hardwear with paranoic care. Since we last covered this on an El Reg thread I've done what I'd said I'd do then and bought a large capacity memory stick which takes all the family photos and a few important documents. This is now in my daughter's home, two or three mile away.

      Then, after backing up the important stuff onto separate internal HDDs and again onto a pair of external USB HDDs that I alternate, then and only then do I consider cloud backups as a final fail safe for as much as I can save on free accounts ( several different free accounts, because, well, who knows).

      1. Hey Nonny Nonny Mouse

        Coincidentally a colleague used your backup to memory stick scheme for all the pics of his children, the data recovery bill for the the failed hard drive wasn't too terrible, only £500 quid.

        I'd trust a memory stick less than almost any cloud backup, they have a nasty habit of being fine ten minutes ago to where's all my data gone?

        They're only any good for transferring data between machines, the number of "high quality, lifetime guarantee" sticks that have failed for me isn't small.

        And yes, I use name brand sticks, no they're not cheap knockoffs.

        1. Terry 6 Silver badge

          But, in my case the memory stick is the fall back in case my PC is destroyed, taking out the internal HDDs, the external USB HDD which is sitting on top and the other USB HDD on the shelf. And I can still reclaim most of my important stuff from the various clouds.

          But now you have me thinking I should put the second USB HDD in another room.

          Back in a minute.............

          .....Oh. Did that and discovered I already have another backup in there, on an old laptop hdd that I'd stuck in an enclosure, but it only goes up to last September, I'd forgotten about it ( and to be honest there's not been much to backup since then anyway).

  5. CPU

    Cheap as chips

    Bad form on Kayeya part, all they had to do (in extreme) was put the account on hold while they sorted the customer out. If you must buy a 'all you can eat buffet' service at $48 a year, why not have 2x services, it's peanuts compared to the value of the data being stored.

  6. Philip Storry

    Such bad planning!

    Terabytes stored ONLY in cloud backups? That's bad planning.

    Sure, you need an off-site backup for the worst possible case. For many large companies, it can be at another site that they own or have long-term secure access to. But for small companies and individuals, the cloud is fine.

    However, you should always have a local store as well. Because a large amount of data is going to be faster off local spindles than down through your internet connection. Sure, your worst case is that fire or flood means you have to go with offsite. But onsite is what you should be reaching for in most situations.

    To not have that for 36Tb of data is baffling. Is it actually a backup? Or is it an archive? If it's just an archive, then it needs its own backup.

    Either way, it's bad planning. Hopefully he's learned a lesson here...

    1. Anonymous Coward Silver badge

      Re: Such bad planning!

      What makes you think it was only stored there? It's certainly not mentioned in the article.

      > "found his backup data had been deleted when he tried to login on February 18 this year"

      Doesn't mean that he _needed_ to get something from the backup, nor that there wasn't any other backup. It's quite possible that this was when he logged in to test his restore process.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Such bad planning!

        It still means he'd been paying for something he didn't get.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Such bad planning!

        What makes you think it was only stored there? It's certainly not mentioned in the article.

        Nope, sounds like he lost the lot. From the article:-

        He added that Spanning had made "no viable offer" of compensation or retribution for the "three years of lost data."

    2. Ian Johnston Silver badge

      Re: Such bad planning!

      Terabytes stored ONLY in cloud backups?

      If it was really backups, what's the problem? The original data must still be available to him. If it was only in the cloud it wasn't a backup.

  7. Blackjack Silver badge

    Offline backups forever

    Is shit like this why I keep my personal backups and do them offline.


    [His annual renewal was accepted on November 12 but then all 36TB of his backup data was deleted on November 28 with no emails about the deletion, he claimed.]

    That is scummy as hell.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ....and another thing........

    .....about backups...........the general tone of the article implies that backups are a "push" process.......along the lines of "upload the backup AND ONLY download if you happen to need something".


    This implication is quite misleading. It's important to do regular testing of the restore process. If these tests expose ANY FAILURE AT ALL, then the backup is likely to be either corrupt or completely useless when a restore is really needed.


    This regular testing is necessary for local backups, and I would have thought it is EVEN MORE necessary for cloud backups. I wonder if Chris Colotti was completely certain that his 36TB would be effective when he really needed to restore all or part of it! If he was not certain, then he was wasting his $48/year fees.

  9. Sitaram Chamarty

    this guy is a STORAGE EXEC


    unlike some of you guys, I have no sympathy for him. He definitely should know better.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

      Including knowing to read the EULA. And to put on the least favourable construction when clauses clash.

      1. vtcodger Silver badge

        Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

        Why bother to try to read the EULA? We all know that it says "You agree to send us money and we don't promise to do anything -- at all ... ever -- in return" in about 100,000 carefully chosen, incomprehensible, words.

        As far as I can see the only hope we consumers have is that a vengeful and angry deity will someday turn up and start casting nasty vendors and their legal staffs into a blazing pit. I do not anticipate that happening any time soon.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

          As EULAs go it's quite short. Only 9 pages.

        2. Terry 6 Silver badge

          Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

          And this is not a new thing. 50 years ago it was known as the bus ticket clause. Because the Ts and Cs referred to on the back of the bus ticket basically said that in return for buying a ticket they'd try to take you somewhere other than the place where you got on, if they could.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

      And according to the article works for "another data protection vendor".

      Why didn't he use his own company's system? Not as good as Spanning?

      1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

        Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

        Not as good as Spanning?

        Wow, even worse? Is that actually possible?

      2. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge

        Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

        He couldn't afford it. Cohesity storage ain't cheap.

    3. Muppet Boss

      Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

      > this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

      > unlike some of you guys, I have no sympathy for him. He definitely should know better.

      I trust he knows better if he preferred to avoid own backup company. As every exec worthy of own ambitions, he could happen to have a large mortgage on an expensive modern glass house. I hope he is careful when throwing stones into other businesses, they tend to return home.


      Begin with Backup

      Your data is a uniquely valuable asset to the business, but first, it needs to be protected and available at all times. With the Cohesity platform, you can ensure continuity and repurpose your data for additional value. Start by eliminating infrastructure silos to remove cost and complexity, then do more with your data through value-added apps and services.

      (no popcorn icon, so yet another beer for me)

      1. wcpreston

        Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

        Cohesity does offer data protection of some SaaS products. They do not appear to offer one for G-Suite (now Google Workspace). They also, like my employer, Druva, do not market to the "prosumer" space.

        I therefore see nothing wrong with him using another company's service to back up his personal data. This isn't a case of "he didn't eat his own dogfood."

        1. Muppet Boss

          Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

          Thanks for clarification regarding Cohesity not supporting Formerly G Suite, upvoting. I did not spend much time checking what they can or cannot do. I checked again now and it seems to be one of those companies whose product is very difficult to understand. There seems to be not much technical data at all: I did not find any technical manuals, documentation, technical product description, reference architectures, installation and integration guides --- but there is a lot of marketing glitter indeed. They seem to sell something that can be installed in minutes, does not require maintenance, provides 95% reduction in recovery times, 20x faster restore time (thanks, I can do math), fully protects from ransomware and reduces backup costs by 40% --- you just need to believe.

          When thinking about advantages of believing in marketing, another thing came to my mind. I can question this fine gentleman's canine food preferences however I certainly cannot question his faith: he seemed to seriously believe in "no limit on storage capacity or number of backups" for just 4 dollars a month. It is truly a disaster to lose faith, I wish him the best of luck in recovering it.

          I would be interested to see the Mean Time to Restore Faith metrics though.

    4. Ahosewithnoname

      Re: this guy is a STORAGE EXEC

      I'm sure Cohesity's EULAs are free of any of the awful practices he describes..

  10. Billy Whiz

    The mist clears......

    ..... as "it looked just like most other messages from them I got weekly or monthly." ....

    sounds like a moronic plot to force you to read their marketing bollocks.

  11. foxyshadis

    Honestly, yeah, if you sign up with a company that offers unlimited hosting and then they change around the EULA so that when you renew, you're kicked off, that's absolutely shitty and I sympathize. I doubt this dude lost everything, or anything like that, but he's royally pissed off that a promise that was offered wasn't kept, and I would be too.

    Let this be a lesson to any company that offers "unlimited" anything.

  12. Graham Cobb Silver badge

    If its too good to be true...

    If a service is really offering to store 36TB for only $48 a year then either (i) it is a scam - the data won't be there when you need it, or (ii) the company is going to go bust and the data won't be there when you need it.

    If you really want to store important backups online, check out major market leaders (Amazon, Google, Backblaze, etc) and expect to pay prices similar to those. Otherwise: the data won't be there when you need it.

    For my personal data, I have good local backups and I use cloud storage for offline backup - expecting to never need it but just in case. I am storing a few TB and I am paying much more than $48/year.

  13. Victor Ludorum

    Amazon S3 Glacier?

    I'm not suggesting that AWS S3 Glacier is the cheapest online storage available, but it's certainly not expensive. Their quick calculator suggests that they charge ~$4/TB/month, so he'd be looking at ~$144/month plus retrieval charges. The guy supposedly understands storage so how did he think he was going to get away with 36TB for $4/month?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Amazon S3 Glacier?

      Come to that, why didn't he use his own company's service? Probably because this was cheaper. Now he knows why.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Amazon S3 Glacier?

      There are cheaper options with these larger companies if you dig. I have ~300TB stored, with no retrieval fees and I pay less than that monthly fee per year.

  14. Anonymous South African Coward Silver badge

    Such things like this is why I prefer to keep three copies of backup.

    One on Amazon glacier. At this stage it is cheap enough, so we'll just keep on filling it up until we reach a certain point, then look at deleting older data.

    One on a NAS - weekly

    One on a removable HDD (a new HDD is procured every month and a full backup is chucked onto it) - monthly for 6 months.

  15. HammerOn1024

    And just another reason...

    Not to trust ANYONE else with your data. My 16 TB is replicated across two servers and a tape system; none of the three are collocated and both servers are dissimilar systems. Compared to the loss of the data, the cost of the system, built in 2013, is immaterial.

    1. Sudosu

      Re: And just another reason...

      I have a similar amount of data; one live set, one local backup and another in a different city at a location I work from on occasion. I haven't used tapes in a long, long time as hard drives are pretty cheapish.

      The physical servers were built in around 2010 and I've had to replace the odd power supply as the one location gets a lot of spikes killing both UPSes and PS.

      I use OmniOS with Napp-it for a fairly minimal Solaris derived OS with ZFS to reduce the risk of data corruption. I've had the odd drive fail after the initial rash of a dozen of my 3GB Segates clicking to death.

      I did reinstall the OS when OmniOS went under and became the community version just to start clean, but that is a quick task.

      The HGST's and WD Reds I use now are rock solid, and I usually just swap in place with larger and re-purpose the smaller old ones to another machine when I want more space on the servers.

      Most of the data is pretty static, usually deltas are less than 50GB per week. I either replicate over the wire or if there is a large change I replicate the delta to a hard drive and physically transport that and replicate to my off site.

      Anyway, the TL;DR moral of my story is;

      One copy local,

      One at a safe site,

      ZFS for integrity.,

      Sleep well at night

      1. Terry 6 Silver badge

        Re: And just another reason...

        Matter of interest, do you have an archival copy in case something gets over-written across your backups without you realising?

        1. Sudosu

          Re: And just another reason...

          For the rapidly changing data (about 500GB) I usually keep at least 4 copies\versions on the on site backup server with timelines based on my risk aversion level for each workload. It varies within that data set.

          I do have an old desktop (another OmniOs) with a pile of drives in it on site that I replicate manually to every so often in case the source replicates a corruption problem on the more static data as you mentioned. Its a lot of smaller drives and weighs a ton so I don't travel with it.

          I eat the risk on the deltas for the more static data, but its nothing that I cannot re-source for the most part (i.e. ripped copy of some of my DVD's or something along that line)

          Really with ZFS you can do periodic snapshots and rollback (aka manually go dig out to recover) older versions of files.

          This however does consume more space for every disk write (all deltas have to be preserved) but you can do different pools based on what criteria you are looking for. I guess you could even do a file comparison hash on source and destination files to alert on differences. That would take some time on my current setup as I am sure there are millions of files.

  16. Claptrap314 Silver badge

    The universe is finite

    NOTHING is unlimited. I don't expect average people to understand this. But ANYONE working a technical job in the IT industry must know this. Even CTOs.

    Honestly, I would expect England's advertising standards body to go after anyone making an "unlimited" offer.

    But I'm having a really, really hard time sympathizing with this guy.

    1. KBeee Silver badge

      Re: The universe is finite

      I'm not so sure about the Advertising Standards being onside with this. Weren't they the ones that said it was ok for an ISP to offer "unlimited broadband", when if you used it as unlimited you got closed down under a Fair Use Policy?

      1. Claptrap314 Silver badge

        Re: The universe is finite

        As a Left-Pondian, I yield to your superior local knowledge.

  17. Glenn Amspaugh

    Rules Testing

    Reminds me of numerous stories going back to compuserve/AoL days; users would use a verbal/ad loophole to abuse a commercial offering and then be all rage upset over inevitable take down.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Rules Testing

      If somebody makes an offer like that it's up to them to make sure it says what they mean and if it doesn't to stand over it because it would be their fault.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Rules Testing

      Back in the AOL days, I used to have a dedicated phone line just for the AOL freephone dial up connection. Was connected 24/7.

      When we ended up getting adsl after a few years of that, when cancelling, we complained a little when we didn't get the correct refund. The guy on the phone said, you had connected a couple of times in that period, and looking at your connection history, your account is probably the most used we have.

      I said, ok then, didn't matter. 3 years 24/7 connected for 9.99/m. 56k, nice.

      The AOL client would disconnect after 15 mins of inactivity, just set a ping up on the computer sharing the connection, always on.

  18. Zippy´s Sausage Factory

    This is always going to be the way shady dealers think - the data isn't yours any more. You've given it to them, now you're just renting it back.

    Kind of like one of those all-your-data-is-encrypted-now-pay-us-money ransomware schemes, except with a monthly payment deal.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    $48 a year CxO

    If your data is so important that $48 a year is the max, guess how good the Cohesity product must be...

  20. Cynic_999

    I need ...

    A reliable backup service. I will pay an unlimited amount of money for this service.

    (Of course, by "unlimited" I mean "not excessive". And I define "excessive" as anything more than 50 pence.)

  21. Stu J

    What a tool...

    Didn't read the EULA.

    Didn't do his sums.

    If it's too good to be true, it probably is.

    Assuming even at bulk hard disk prices with no resilience, you're talking at least $10 per TB, or minimum $360 for the amount he was storing. Mirror it and it's $720. And then there's data transfer costs too. Far less than the total amount he paid. He thought it was a "win-lose" situation, it was actually a "lose-lose" situation.

    It's AWS-hosted - and even at Glacier prices, 36TB would be $1770 per year. No wonder they fucked him off, the only surprise is they didn't do it much MUCH sooner...!

    Also, if they'd let him export his 36TB backup, then the AWS Data Egress charges would have been over $3,000. I'm not surprised they just threw it in the bin if they were legally covered to do so...

  22. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "Our customers are our top priority"

    Of course they are.

    Until you decide that they aren't any more.

    Anyway, this whole thing just demonstrates once again that you should actually read the EULA for products that deal with backing up your data. Nothing is more important than that.

    That said, Spanning is definitely guilty of false advertising. I checked out their website and it is clearly stated : "With no limit on storage capacity or number of backups ". To put that on your website and then bury limits in the EULA is really bad form. Spanning is clearly spinning a lie to bring in victims customers, no doubt betting on the fact that most people don't have all that much to backup.

    Sneaky and dishonest.

  23. urnathan

    It sounds like he was using the service to *archive* his data, not back it up. Unless he's suffered a catastrophic local disk failure between nov 28 and now, he's not lost any data.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "Unless he's suffered a catastrophic local disk failure between nov 28 and now"

      The reason you back stuff up is to protect against the possibility of such a failure. Irrespective of whether he suffered such a failure or not the possibility that he'd paid (a disproportionately small sum) to mitigate remained.

    2. Stoneshop Silver badge
      Big Brother

      using the service to *archive* his data,

      That's how you get to 36TB.

      Anyway, he may not have lost any current data, but if he was using Spanning for archival purposes he's and he wanted to access some historical stuff he's got a problem now.

      Say, the IRS wants to have a closer look at some large tax deductions he'd claimed for a previous declaration ...

  24. aldolo

    36TB is not for small business

    unless you are a video maker 36TB is an huge amount of data.this story smell too much.

    1. foxyshadis

      Re: 36TB is not for small business

      Have you seen the mind-boggling sizes of recent iPhone images and video? Photos are 12000x9000 and video is 4K, plus you have motion photos which are a photo combined with 5 seconds of video, and that's on by default! If you take a lot of pics and vids, you can accumulate terabytes in no time. Same if you're a photographer using a recent high-end SLR.

      It's not your daddy's data storage world anymore.

  25. Tim Hines

    One version is not a backup

    If he's lost the data, then it implies the cloud copy wasn't a backup, but was the primary copy and that there was no backup. If it was a backup he could have just generated a new backup from the primary.

  26. Uplink

    Limits not imposed

    Basically they didn't write any code to display errors when you reach a limit, but they're keeping an eye on it, likely with an excel sheet emailed to some higher up once a month. Then they store your data in /dev/null for free.

  27. Nate Amsden Silver badge

    agree with the other posters

    This CEO is an idiot. Don't care what the EULA says don't be paying such tiny amounts of money for such a massive amount of storage, the math doesn't work out, not even close. It's like people wanting to leverage google drive for a few dollars a month and storing hundreds of gigs to tens or hundreds of TBs and somehow think that is a reasonable thing to do. It's so beyond absurd I don't even have words.

    And what kind of small business has that much data? Really sounds fishy. Maybe this CEO is trying to disguise his hoarding habits by saying it's for his "Small business".

    To add insult to injury the guy is a CEO of a storage company. He has no right to be angry he should be embarrassed for being so stupid about this, and then doubling down and going public about it. Hell he could of fired off an email to people on his IT team and said "hey I'm thinking about using this for X, what do you think?" Or maybe he did and he didn't agree with their response.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: agree with the other posters

      @Nate Amsden

      I totally agree with you. But there is maybe another scenario…

      1. He convinced his wife to backup her business data to a different company to the one he works for, because he knows best…

      2. Now it has gone wrong, because he did not know best, so now he is trying to blame anyone but himself…

      3. I wish him good luck in getting a shag from his wife in future.

      4. The man is now, literally a cheapskate I know everything, wanker.

  28. FlippingGerman

    Unlimited fun

    They really shouldn't use the "unlimited term" - if you can't handle the extreme users, you're not really offering it.

    I use Backblaze, which unfortunately uses the same word, and I'm at about 2TB, which is unlikely to grow. Decent company, it seems, but I'd quite like them to stop saying that. I wonder if saying "up to 5TB" makes people want the ability to pay less for less storage?

  29. Arab

    Maybe I'm missing something but doesn't "Backup" imply that you are making a copy of data and that this is not the only instance of the data?

    To give an example for the benefit of Mr. Colotti: I might take a photo with my camera and the resulting picture may only be on my camera. If I copy the picture to a backup and if this backup is later deleted, my only pain will be that I need to backup the picture again; I won't actually loose any data.

    How could somebody in the industry not understand the difference? How could somebody in the industry who doesn't understand the difference be so stupid as to come out with a public rant which just serves to prove his stupidity and lack of suitability for the job he is in?

    1. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge


      He genuinely has been using Keyasa for primary storage, in which case he's a tool and should know better given his job, or...

      He's just lost the copy and not the original, in which case he's a tool for making a fuss about nothing.

      Either way he's a tool. Sure he didn't get what he thought he was paying for, but he should know better than anyone to read the small print.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022