Chugging right along on the feature enhancement locomotive, following the extension of networking capabilities of their Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) offerings last week (see: AWS’ New Networking Capabilities – Sucking Less 😉 ,) Amazon Web Services today announced the availability of dedicated (both on-demand and dedicated) compute instances within a VPC:
Dedicated Instances are Amazon EC2 instances launched within your Amazon Virtual Private Cloud (Amazon VPC) that run hardware dedicated to a single customer. Dedicated Instances let you take full advantage of the benefits of Amazon VPC and the AWS cloud – on-demand elastic provisioning, pay only for what you use, and a private, isolated virtual network, all while ensuring that your Amazon EC2 compute instances will be isolated at the hardware level.
That’s interesting, isn’t it? I remember writing this post ” Calling All Private Cloud Haters: Amazon Just Peed On Your Fire Hydrant… and chuckling when AWS announced VPC back in 2009 in which I suggested that VPC:
- Legitimized Private Cloud as a reasonable, needed, and prudent step toward Cloud adoption for enterprises,
- Substantiated the value proposition of Private Cloud as a way of removing a barrier to Cloud entry for enterprises, and
- Validated the ultimate vision toward hybrid Clouds and Inter-Cloud
That got some hackles up.
So this morning, people immediately started squawking on Twitter about how this looked remarkably like (or didn’t) private cloud or dedicated hosting. This is why, about two years ago, I generated this taxonomy that pointed out the gray area of “private cloud” — the notion of who manages it, who owns the infrastructure, where it’s located and who it’s consumed by:
I did a lot of this work well before I utilized it in the original Cloud Security Alliance Guidance architecture chapter I wrote, but that experienced refined what I meant a little more clearly and this version was produced PRIOR to the NIST guidance which is why you don’t see mention of “community cloud”:
- Private
Private Clouds are provided by an organization or their designated service provider and offer a single-tenant (dedicated) operating environment with all the benefits and functionality of elasticity* and the accountability/utility model of Cloud. The physical infrastructure may be owned by and/or physically located in the organization’s datacenters (on-premise) or that of a designated service provider (off-premise) with an extension of management and security control planes controlled by the organization or designated service provider respectively. The consumers of the service are considered “trusted.” Trusted consumers of service are those who are considered part of an organization’s legal/contractual umbrella including employees, contractors, & business partners. Untrusted consumers are those that may be authorized to consume some/all services but are not logical extensions of the organization.
- Public
Public Clouds are provided by a designated service provider and may offer either a single-tenant (dedicated) or multi-tenant (shared) operating environment with all the benefits and functionality of elasticity and the accountability/utility model of Cloud. The physical infrastructure is generally owned by and managed by the designated service provider and located within the provider’s datacenters (off-premise.) Consumers of Public Cloud services are considered to be untrusted.
- Managed
Managed Clouds are provided by a designated service provider and may offer either a single-tenant (dedicated) or multi-tenant (shared) operating environment with all the benefits and functionality of elasticity and the accountability/utility model of Cloud.The physical infrastructure is owned by and/or physically located in the organization’s datacenters with an extension of management and security control planes controlled by the designated service provider. Consumers of Managed Clouds may be trusted or untrusted.
- Hybrid
Hybrid Clouds are a combination of public and private cloud offerings that allow for transitive information exchange and possibly application compatibility and portability across disparate Cloud service offerings and providers utilizing standard or proprietary methodologies regardless of ownership or location. This model provides for an extension of management and security control planes. Consumers of Hybrid Clouds may be trusted or untrusted.
* Note: the benefits of elasticity don’t imply massive scale, which in many cases is not a relevant requirement for an enterprise. Also, ultimately I deprecated the “managed” designation because it was a variation on a theme, but you can tell that ultimately the distinction I was going for between private and hybrid is the notion of OR versus AND designations in the various criteria.
AWS’ dedicated VPC options now give you another ‘OR’ option when thinking about who manages, owns the infrastructure your workloads run on, and more importantly where. More specifically, the notion of ‘virtual’ cloud becomes less and less important as the hybrid nature of interconnectedness of resources starts to make more sense — regardless of whether you use overlay solutions like CloudSwitch, “integrated” solutions from vendors like VMware or Citrix or from AWS. In the long term, the answer will probably be “D) all of the above.”
Providing dedicated compute atop a hypervisor for which you are the only tenant will be attractive to many enterprises who have trouble coming to terms with sharing memory/cpu resources with other customers. This dedicated functionality costs a pretty penny – $87,600 a year, and as Simon Wardley pointed out that this has an interesting effect inasmuch as it puts a price tag on isolation:
Here’s the interesting thing that goes to the title of this post:
Is this a capability that AWS really expects to be utilized as they further blur the lines between public, private and hybrid cloud models OR is it a defensive strategy hinged on the exorbitant costs to further push enterprises into shared compute and overlay security models?
Specifically, one wonders if this is a strategically defensive or offensive move?
A single tenant atop a hypervisor atop dedicated hardware — that will go a long way toward addressing one concern: noisy (and nosy) neighbors.
Now, keep in mind that if an enterprise’s threat modeling and risk management frameworks are reasonably rational, they’ll realize that this is compute/memory isolation only. Clearly the network and storage infrastructure is still shared, but the “state of the art” in today’s cloud of overlay encryption (file systems and SSL/IPSec VPNs) will likely address those issues. Shared underlying cloud management/provisioning/orchestration is still an interesting area of concern.
So this will be an interesting play for AWS. Whether they’re using this to take a hammer to the existing private cloud models or just to add another dimension in service offering (logical, either way) I think in many cases enterprises will pay this tax to further satisfy compliance requirements by removing the compute multi-tenancy boogeyman.
/Hoff
…to which I responded that clearly there is room for improvement in L3+ and security. I expect we’ll see some 😉
The feasibility for this vector was deftly demonstrated shortly afterward by the guys at SensePost (
/Hoff
Recent Comments