Anyone but Oracle
Hasn't the US gov sued Oracle for abusing past contracts?
In another chapter to a saga that refuses to die, the US government has recommended [PDF] that the Supreme Court rejects Oracle’s efforts to overturn a Department of Defense decision to award the $10bn JEDI contract to Microsoft. Acknowledging there were problems with the controversial contract award, which fellow bidder AWS …
Sounds about right. Whilst the sums involved are vast magnitudes less, I have several experiences that spring to mind of being involved in ERP and other solutions procurement processes for UK regulated businesses where Oracle have challenged scoring despite very clearly not fulfilling the response requirements of the underlying RFP or regulated tendering process itself.
Notwithstanding the fact that they do obviously win a lot of business, I think perhaps some parts of their organisation (in the UK at least) have this view that the rules don't apply to them, or that they can just bully their way through to a successful conclusion.
What is there to stop an Oracle or an Amazonian creating and deploying its very own private/pirate JEDI Warrior ProgramMING Project ... to joust and jostle with any and all other aspirant wannabes or Knight Commanders of the Cyber Realm/Virtual Terrain Team Seescape if ever challenged to prove who be worthy champion of true kings and queens and almighty protector and passionate lover of damsels in distress.
Be advised though, that way is strictly one way, singular lane traffic. Step through that door and it doesn't open again to let you back out and unknowing of what you glean inside from the other side. If you can't handle terrified to death and/or excited out of your skin, step off the paths entering through the closing open door.
Consider yourselves both legitimately and adequately warned of possible consequences and expectations most likely to be effortlessly afforded and personally experienced by those most worthy of the attention.
cc .... Larry and Jeff @ their respective bunkers/silos
I served 21 years in the US Army, retiring in 1983, and my last assignment, at a Signals Brigade HQ, had a computer that was housed in an "18-wheeler", generators not included. My first civilian employer was Wang Laboratories, whose 10 and 20 MB Top Secret rated drives were almost the size of a VW "bug", and felt as heavy pushing them up a ramp into the test chamber.
Fast forward a little and some distance: At "Smiths Aerospace" in Michigan [later GE aviation] I was testing the very first improvement to some electronics fielded with the US Army's M-1 tanks. Nobody made the a good many active components.
Whenever it is size that matters, apparently nowadays the smaller the better is the space race to be run and won ...... https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/05/ibm-creates-the-worlds-first-2-nm-chip/
But just like in days of yore, it doesn't matter a jot what you have, if you don't know how to use it properly and better than anyone else with something similar but of a different configuration.
The US Army [well, certain postmodern parts definitely] has changed almost beyond all recognition since the times and spaces of your 1962 enlistment and 1983 retirement, cortland. And this recent development is encouraging and surprisingly abreast and au fait with some truly devastating, great game changing discoveries enabling improvements to be remotely jointly betatested to mutually satisfactory satisfying conclusion ..... thus paradoxically resulting in many colossal new beginnings exhibiting massive untouchable leads ........
“Autonomy is crucial to the ability to operate in contested environments where traditional communication and navigation solutions may be challenged,” Breede said. “Collaborative autonomy enables unmanned platforms to operate based on a shared understanding of the environment without active operator control in those contested environments.” ..... https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2021/5/7/shadow-warriors-pursuing-next-gen-surveillance-tech
The idea that multiple vendors would be better value (as is claimed by the AWS/Oracle teams) is, frankly, suspect (as the gov submission notes). Whether or not the admin costs of having more than one supplier are outweighed by the savings on each line item seems less important than the costs of managing twice as many security solutions (and potentially cross-domain solutions between them).
Yes, it's obviously true that no vendor is going to be immune from vulnerabilities, but it's also true that a connection between (say) Azure and AWS will provide twice as big an attack surface.