While I’m not particularly invested in their choice, I will say that I’ve got some counters to the points given as to why not:
Logging for diagnostics: probably the closest point, but you can either centralize such logs where local disk does not matter, or leave log in ram with aggressive rotation out.
Ability to update without rebooting. The diskless systems I work with can be updated live too. However live updates do eat more memory in my case due to reasons that will be clear soon. Besides, a rolling reboot should be fairly non disruptive to “bake” the live updates into the efficient form. Other Diskless situations just live in tmpfs, in which case live updates are no problem at all, though it is a lot of ram to do this.
Diskless uses too much RAM: At least with the setups I work with, the Diskless ram usage is small, as the root filesystem is downloaded on demand with a write overlay in zram to compress all writes. Effectively like a livecd generally boots, but replace cd with a network filesystem.
Very unconvincing. The only point they bring up which actually precludes RAM-only servers is hard drive encryption, which they only need to do because they store data on a hard drive. The whole article reads like them trying to justify a choice they’ve already made rather than a legitimate comparison RAM-only versus hard drives.
Their first point is literally that RAM-only doesn’t help when the power’s on. That’s like saying you shouldn’t wear a seatbelt because it doesn’t protect against someone smashing your window. That’s just not what it’s for.
I largely agree. The title and opening words are misleading. The rest of the article is much more clear that they are defending their position of using VPN software that relies on storage and securing it with full disk encryption.
Also, full disk encryption doesn’t solve everything. If an attacker has access to the running server, the disk is unencrypted. At that point, reading files is much easier than reading RAM from a running process.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !protonprivacy@lemmy.world
Empowering you to choose a better internet where privacy is the default. Protect yourself online with
Proton Mail, Proton VPN, Proton Calendar, Proton Drive. Proton Pass and SimpleLogin.
Proton Mail is the world’s largest secure email provider. Swiss, end-to-end encrypted, private, and free.
Proton VPN is the world’s only open-source, publicly audited, unlimited and free VPN. Swiss-based, no-ads, and no-logs.
Proton Calendar is the world’s first end-to-end encrypted calendar that allows you to keep your life private.
Proton Drive is a free end-to-end encrypted cloud storage that allows you to securely backup and share your files. It’s open source, publicly audited, and Swiss-based.
Proton Pass Proton Pass is a free and open-source password manager which brings a higher level of security with rigorous end-to-end encryption of all data (including usernames, URLs, notes, and more) and email alias support.
SimpleLogin lets you send and receive emails anonymously via easily-generated unique email aliases.
While I’m not particularly invested in their choice, I will say that I’ve got some counters to the points given as to why not:
Very unconvincing. The only point they bring up which actually precludes RAM-only servers is hard drive encryption, which they only need to do because they store data on a hard drive. The whole article reads like them trying to justify a choice they’ve already made rather than a legitimate comparison RAM-only versus hard drives.
Their first point is literally that RAM-only doesn’t help when the power’s on. That’s like saying you shouldn’t wear a seatbelt because it doesn’t protect against someone smashing your window. That’s just not what it’s for.
I largely agree. The title and opening words are misleading. The rest of the article is much more clear that they are defending their position of using VPN software that relies on storage and securing it with full disk encryption.
Also, full disk encryption doesn’t solve everything. If an attacker has access to the running server, the disk is unencrypted. At that point, reading files is much easier than reading RAM from a running process.