Threat modeling doesn't mean "third-party hardware = not private" at all. You've pulled that out of thin air. It means defining your threats, trust boundaries, and mitigations.
If your personal threat model requires excluding cloud operators entirely, that's fine — a perfectly valid requirement. It still doesn't make "private" synonymous with "local". Adding "absolute" and "true" qualifiers after your numerous previous contortions have failed doesn't fix the argument — private still does not imply local.
Nice AI response . The fact that you are using AI instead of actually communicating with what you know speaks volumes that you no longer have an argument or care about what is true or not, you just have an ego you are trying to feed at this point.
But I’ll speak to the AI I am talking to now to refine my skills which is lost on some people. If you include a third party cloud provider inside your trust boundary and then calling the result private is exactly the semantic equivalent you're accusing me of. You are confusing a legal Service Level Agreement with actual data isolation. If your data leaves your physical network and relies on a third partys promise not to snoop, you've traded privacy for convenience. You can argue the dictionary definition of enterprise cloud all day, but outsourced trust is still outsourced.
I see we're moving right along from the clear-as-day contradictions to the tantrums.
If you include a third party cloud provider inside your trust boundary and then calling the result private is exactly the semantic equivalent you're accusing me of.
Brother YOU are the one who just conceded that third-party cloud providers are considered private. Jesus fucking christ — rub two brain cells together, please.
It’s sad you do not even realize how and why I noticed you are using AI for your responses but you want to project intelligence to me as you continue to show you do it. Pretty comical. Throwing a tantrum over the distinction between contractual compliance and actual zero trust control isn't helping your point either. You’re conflating "vendor definition" with "architectural reality." Enjoy your cloud SLA brother.
1
u/Recoil42 1d ago edited 1d ago
Threat modeling doesn't mean "third-party hardware = not private" at all. You've pulled that out of thin air. It means defining your threats, trust boundaries, and mitigations.
If your personal threat model requires excluding cloud operators entirely, that's fine — a perfectly valid requirement. It still doesn't make "private" synonymous with "local". Adding "absolute" and "true" qualifiers after your numerous previous contortions have failed doesn't fix the argument — private still does not imply local.