this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
483 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

82830 readers
4406 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
483
Federal Cyber Experts Thought Microsoft’s Cloud Was “a Pile of Shit.” They Approved It Anyway. (www.propublica.org)
submitted 1 day ago by Beep@lemmus.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • “Cloud First”: To move federal agencies to the cloud, the government created a program known as FedRAMP, whose job was to ensure the security of new technology.
  • Security Breakdown: ProPublica found that FedRAMP authorized a Microsoft product called GCC High to handle sensitive government data, despite years of concerns about its security.
  • Potential Conflict of Interest: The government relies, in part, on third-party firms to vet cloud technology, but those firms are hired and paid by the company being assessed.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yes we get your point, you dont get the point that it leaves them liable to regulators defining it and finding themselves out of compliance with the yet to be defined rules

[–] wholookshere@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 hours ago

There's no legal definition of "yet to be defined" rules. That's not how the US legal system works. You cant define rules after the fact and call someone guilt/in violation of rules that don't exist.