[HN Gopher] Azure Active Directory down
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Azure Active Directory down
        
       Author : Decabytes
       Score  : 77 points
       Date   : 2021-03-15 21:11 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | deathanatos wrote:
       | It is a huge pet peeve of mine that,
       | 
       | a. the status page update took as long as it did.
       | 
       | b. the status page still only claims that AAD is down. You're not
       | "up" if a required dependency of yours is down, IMO, and _most_
       | of the Azure services right now are severely degraded to the
       | point of not being useful due to the AAD outage. Now, that would
       | make your status page look bad, yes. (And I would clearly message
       | on it that the other outages are fallout of AAD on that.)
       | 
       | c. I don't have any real expectation that we'll get a public PM
       | about this. (And a PM _must_ include sufficient information for
       | me to understand what went wrong, and what 's been done to
       | prevent it going forward.)
       | 
       | I had been starting to wonder what sort of incident it would take
       | for them to actually update the status page. I guess this is it.
       | We've witnessed a _number_ of outages in various services over
       | the past few months, none of which made it to the status page. I
       | pushed a support rep on the issue, and was told that they don 't
       | want to cause a panic.
        
         | breatheoften wrote:
         | Bad status pages are a very bad sign in my opinion.
         | 
         | I had to use the IBM cloud for a project once upon a time and
         | the status monitoring was almost always wrong ...
         | 
         | I really hope that as customers we can succeed in making
         | "excellent status reporting" an absolute minimum requirement
         | for cloud services. Observing the quality of the status page
         | reporting history is one of the first things I do now when
         | evaluating a new service -- and no I'm not just looking for a
         | page that shows all greens -- I'm looking for a page that
         | connects to some conceivably meaningful metric as well as
         | detailed reports about major and minor outages ... something to
         | prove that they actually even know if their service is working
         | at a given point in time ...
         | 
         | The IBM cloud page was a page that tended to update in response
         | to my own issue reports (usually if I also pointed out that
         | nothing about the outage appeared on the status page ...). I
         | don't think that's at all an acceptable standard ...
        
         | jrockway wrote:
         | I'm also here because my work is blocked by the inability to do
         | anything on Azure right now.
         | 
         | I looked at their past status histories, and they have provided
         | pretty detailed postmortems for much more minor incidents. I
         | don't have any reason to believe that they won't do that this
         | time. I'm new to Azure, so this kind of outage really looks bad
         | in my mind, but it's par for the course with Cloud stuff.
         | They'll fix it and there will be one less thing to break in the
         | future.
        
           | spondyl wrote:
           | As someone who has been using Azure for 6 months, it's fairly
           | bad but most of the Azure pain is more death by 1000 cuts
           | than large explosions.
           | 
           | Documentation that contains triple negatives, UI elements
           | that have no consistency (clicking off a modal on one page
           | does nothing while doing so on another closes it and clears
           | your data), widgets and modals forgetting state when you
           | navigate to different submenus.
           | 
           | The sort of unexciting stuff that by itself is ok but it
           | slowly makes you descend into madness.
        
             | NDizzle wrote:
             | Just wait until you see their made up rules for using their
             | Redis implementation. You have to roll your own Redis to do
             | anything interesting.
        
               | zanecodes wrote:
               | Their managed PostgreSQL offering also has fun quirks,
               | such as that you have to connect using
               | `username@db_name`, but your actual username in the
               | database is still just `username`, so any third party
               | software needs to support using a different username to
               | connect than it uses to perform user-related queries
               | (they have some sort of application-level load balancer
               | in front of it that uses `db_name` to route the
               | connection).
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | This is ... something - wow - they couldn't just make the
               | actual username "username@db_name"
        
               | zanecodes wrote:
               | Nope. Their load balancer seems to strip the `@db_name`
               | from connections, and anyway some software doesn't like
               | having an @ in Postgres usernames (which is probably also
               | a sign it's vulnerable to SQL injections)
        
           | asabla wrote:
           | Been an active user of Azure for almost five or six years
           | now. Things were a lot more rough in then (especially if
           | you'd seen the old portal), unlike what it is now.
           | 
           | People always talk about cloud as an entity which
           | can/shouldn't have problems at all. When it's more about
           | convenience then anything else. So I wouldn't worry too much
           | about this if I were you.
        
             | deathanatos wrote:
             | I don't particularly expect the cloud to be problem free. I
             | do expect it to be possible to, when an issue is caused by
             | an outage or a service issue, get that escalated to actual
             | engineers. That has not been easy, IMO. Even obvious stuff,
             | like "we sent X request around Y time and got Z 500
             | Internal Server Error from service S" have required
             | multiple round-trips.1
             | 
             | Messaging around transient issues helps. E.g., AWS would
             | often email us to tell us "hey, sorry, such & such VM is
             | being hosed by the underlying hardware, it is migrating but
             | you'll see a forced reboot". That's all I need to know: I
             | expect some interruption to that portion of the system, and
             | I expect to see it heal within a certain time frame, and if
             | it does, great, no support ticket required.
             | 
             | Azure sort of has that with "Resource health"; but, e.g.,
             | one of our recent support tickets is that we had a VM
             | reboot unexpectedly due to a resource health event with its
             | disks. And then, a few hours later, another VM, same
             | resource health event, same issue, same reboot. And then
             | again, a few hours later. And that pattern, with no further
             | communication, requires me to write the (obvious) ticket
             | of, "So... what's happening?"
             | 
             | (That ticket ended with such and such service was
             | experiencing an incident. Never made the status page. It
             | did make the internal "Service alerts" page.)
             | 
             | Part of issuing a PM is also to help show & convince me,
             | the customer, that I won't be filing support issues for the
             | rest of my life. But this last 6 months has just felt like
             | support ticket after support ticket, and it's sort of
             | depressing, since I'd rather be coding. I do think, last
             | spring or so, it was no nearly this bad.
             | 
             | 1Every place I've worked at... we page on 5xx codes sent to
             | a client. If Azure is internally doing that, it sure is
             | hard to tell from where I sit.
        
       | NDizzle wrote:
       | Affecting Teams, Azdo, and likely more services.
       | 
       | It turned the whole afternoon into learning time at our company.
       | Thankfully our Okta integration goes through our on prem AD
       | servers and not purely AAD. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to get
       | to learning resources which authenticate through AD!
        
       | spondyl wrote:
       | As someone working at a company that pays for Azure support, it's
       | pretty sad that Microsoft 365's Status Twitter account has been
       | providing more insight than Azure's own status page
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/MSFT365Status/status/1371554704518352896
       | 
       | They actually acknowledged it was due to a "recent change to an
       | authentication system" where Azure Support just vaguely mentions
       | an outage
        
       | heyflyguy wrote:
       | I am naive, but it is crazy to me that we experience outages of
       | any magnitude like this from any major supplier (GOOG/MS/AMZN). I
       | get alot of crap for being crotchety about making my backups in
       | and out of the cloud, and it's stuff like this that proves my
       | point!
        
         | ocdtrekkie wrote:
         | "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop
         | up the drain." - Scotty
         | 
         | Trying to provide globally available, replicated service that
         | meets every and all needs 24/7/365 is basically making Active
         | Directory about 600x more complicated than it would be
         | otherwise. It's basically impossible for a service that
         | complicated to meet the uptime of... installing Windows Server
         | 2019 on a VM and patching it monthly. (Bear in mind, if I know
         | when my business is not affected by an outage, I can do it
         | without being disruptive. Microsoft, by definition, cannot.
         | Every moment is critical since their customers are everywhere.)
         | 
         | There are types of businesses to which the former might be a
         | necessary solution, but most would be better off with the
         | latter. It'll be really interesting when people start realizing
         | the cloud is mostly just a scam to get people on subscription
         | revenue streams, and not actually providing any greater
         | reliability or less management overhead than what they had
         | before.
        
           | heyflyguy wrote:
           | I agree!
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Plus, with a massive customer base and eating their own dog
           | food makes their schedule be a priority over other customers.
           | Your priority is lower than theirs.
           | 
           | Microsoft is always a shitshow this time of year.
           | Infrastructure changes usually land ahead of spring releases.
        
             | ocdtrekkie wrote:
             | Indeed, no matter how much we pay Microsoft, they will not
             | care about our business as we care about our business.
        
       | _Understated_ wrote:
       | You know, in some ways I'm actually glad that Azure AD is down: I
       | ran a SQL update and right after it I started seeing errors and
       | thought I'd done something wrong... I've been shitting myself for
       | an hour :D
        
       | Severian wrote:
       | Teams completely borked because of this. My employer hugely
       | depends on this as we all WFH, and basically has stopped all
       | communication outside of email (thank god we are on-prem).
        
       | bombcar wrote:
       | I was seeing:
       | 
       | DX10501:+Signature+validation+failed.+Unable+to+match+keys:+
       | kid:+'[PII+is+hidden]',+ token:+'[PII+is+hidden]'.
       | 
       | and sure enough, it seems it was some authentication thing going
       | sideways
        
       | dnndev wrote:
       | I run a saas company and we use azure ad. B2B sales. Good thing
       | is we are down but so are they. This is strangely not that bad.
       | Left the office early today
        
       | king_magic wrote:
       | This should be a huge shitshow for Microsoft. This never should
       | have happened.
       | 
       | Azure AD taking down pretty much the entirety of Azure / O365 /
       | Teams is frankly inexcusable. Astounding incompetence, and an
       | astonishing single point of failure that needs to be re-
       | architected.
        
         | macintux wrote:
         | In fairness to Microsoft, there's no way to make authentication
         | _not_ a single point of failure.
         | 
         | You have to make the service as resilient as possible, which
         | clearly they failed at, but you can't very well fail over from
         | your AD service to something else.
        
           | king_magic wrote:
           | Microsoft is rolling back some update they pushed that borked
           | Azure AD.
           | 
           | Early signs are not pointing to this as a service resilience
           | issue - this appears to be sheer incompetence - pushing an
           | update that was likely not tested well enough that broke
           | pretty much everything. More than that, why aren't updates to
           | Azure AD being rolled out regionally? Why is Azure AD
           | architected in such a way that the _entire thing_ going down
           | can do so much damage?
           | 
           | It's pretty hard to be understanding with a preventable
           | screwup with this kind of global scale.
        
             | adflux wrote:
             | You are making a whole bunch of assumptions here without
             | ANY info about how Microsoft rolls out updates to its Azure
             | services.
        
               | extrapickles wrote:
               | For something as critical as auth, I would expect most
               | changes to be rolled out over a few days just to make
               | sure something like this cannot happen to everyone.
               | Ideally a change would be shadowed for a few % of traffic
               | before it was allowed to start rolling out.
        
               | regecks wrote:
               | To add another datapoint, we recently faced an issue
               | where Microsoft rolled out a change to their OIDC
               | endpoints, which broke our client's tenant, but not other
               | tenants. (It was crashing with an HTTP 500 if the Accept
               | request header was a certain value: the default value in
               | OpenJDK 8).
               | 
               | Some days later and after our complaints, Microsoft
               | rolled back the change.
               | 
               | I would call this evidence that they do practice gradual
               | deployments of changes.
               | 
               | I would guess that this outage was caused by something
               | more complex than MS not slow-rolling their deployment.
        
               | king_magic wrote:
               | Sure, but those assumptions are largely backed up by _a
               | single update to Azure AD_ knocking it out worldwide. End
               | of the day, whatever they pushed was not nearly well
               | tested enough, and they paid for it with a massive global
               | outage that borked pretty much everything they sell.
        
           | hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
           | They could quite easily have progressive migrations,
           | blue/green deployments, or a failover environment..
        
       | ocdtrekkie wrote:
       | Every time someone tells me we should move to the cloud, it seems
       | like there's an outage the same day. Microsoft isn't actually any
       | good at managing your IT infrastructure for you.
       | 
       | Between Exchange 365 outages and Azure AD outages, I'm not sure
       | how anyone thinks moving Windows infrastructure to the cloud is
       | not an existential risk to business operations.
        
       | EMM_386 wrote:
       | It seems to be coming back online now.
       | 
       | Strange that HN was down at exactly the same time, although this
       | is reported to be unrelated.
       | 
       | > CURRENT STATUS: Engineering teams are currently rolling out
       | mitigation worldwide. Customers should begin seeing recovery at
       | this time, with full mitigation expected within 60 minutes. This
       | message was last updated at 21:12 UTC on 15 March 2021
        
       | hateful wrote:
       | cloud=a single point of failure for the whole world!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-15 23:02 UTC)