by danso on 7/15/25, 12:18 PM with 50 comments
by beoberha on 7/15/25, 2:14 PM
I assume it is OK to say this: Microsoft has a “China” cloud and a non-airgapped “US Government” cloud. It is standard practice that engineers making production touches in the clouds have to be “escorted” by vendors who make sure you’re not doing anything malicious. I assume the article is implying that these vendors for the US Gov cloud may be Chinese nationals.
As Jason mentions in another comment, anything actually requiring clearance is serviced by the airgapped clouds and only folks with clearance are able to operate there.
Edit: misread the article but the third paragraph stands. The government is totally aware of where the operator boundary lies and this is still wildly mischaracterized.
by jasonthorsness on 7/15/25, 1:39 PM
The top secret stuff isn’t using this system; it’s using cleared staff.
by opello on 7/15/25, 1:33 PM
by MisterTea on 7/15/25, 2:15 PM
by datadrivenangel on 7/15/25, 1:34 PM
by charcircuit on 7/15/25, 1:27 PM
Edit: It's people who watch over what foriegn engineers are doing.
by drcongo on 7/15/25, 1:22 PM
by jwithington on 7/17/25, 10:49 AM
some engineers who write the code for production US systems that contain controlled unclassified information live in china. the US government was unaware that this was happening because MSFT hid it from them. as a result, govt stakeholders are/were unable to assess the risk.
all MSFT ATO's should be revoked.
some of the comments point out that foreign workers will help maintain facilities overseas, but govt stakeholders are aware of this, assess the risk, and implement risk controls.
but shady M$FT hid this from govt, and that amplifies the problem!
disclaimer: am google
by DarkmSparks on 7/15/25, 2:56 PM
Worst part is I'm not really surprised.
by jmclnx on 7/15/25, 1:21 PM
The fun of using Cloud type systems. I expect AWS, Google and maybe IBM Cloud has the same issue. Save $ now, pay lots more later.
by svaha1728 on 7/15/25, 1:25 PM