[HN Gopher] Iranian missile blitz takes down AWS data centers in...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Iranian missile blitz takes down AWS data centers in Bahrain and
       Dubai
        
       Author : lschueller
       Score  : 113 points
       Date   : 2026-04-04 18:23 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tomshardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tomshardware.com)
        
       | VoidWarranty wrote:
       | Not to be insensitive about the humanitarian and economic
       | situation, but, I am curious why there are data centers in that
       | region at all? It just seems horribly inefficient from a cooling
       | and electricity standpoint. Not to mention water.
       | 
       | My pessimistic assumption is that Amazon said "yes" to handouts
       | from regional government efforts to be relevant in tech, and that
       | those data centers dont really matter to anyone but local
       | politicians and monarchs who believe they have a seat at the
       | table.
        
         | Fairburn wrote:
         | Once Iran ramps up, its going to be a free-for-all against all
         | US data infrastructure. Iran has friends in low places so they
         | don't have to do all of the dirty work themselves. This should
         | be a wake-up call.
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | Why would water for data center be an issue there? They dont
         | need to drink it.
         | 
         | It was business for those contries. Just like finance, travel
         | and wgat have you.
        
           | wiml wrote:
           | Water is used for cooling. You take in liquid water, release
           | water vapor, and the phase transition takes away a lot of
           | heat. Otherwise you need to pump that heat into dry air,
           | which is much more difficult (energy-expensive). It's the
           | same thing you do when you sweat.
        
         | InvisibleUp wrote:
         | Hundreds of millions of people live in the Middle East and a
         | lot of large corporations are based there. Likely they thought
         | it would be profitable, and likely they saw some decent use.
        
         | mnky9800n wrote:
         | I think you are overfitting to temperature as a variable in
         | this decision making equation.
        
         | einszwei wrote:
         | Data centers can run on closed loop cooling systems which
         | doesn't need continuous water supply. Only bottleneck is Energy
         | supply which the MEA area doesn't lack.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | I imagine the same reason they have a data center in places
         | like Sao Paulo. More locally centred businesses want the low
         | ping, and AWS wants to be your cloud compute provider of choice
         | no matter where your target audience is.
        
         | rkagerer wrote:
         | If anyone here is involved in making decisions about where to
         | locate such centers, I'd love to hear more about how
         | geopolitical risk factors in, and whether you plan and price
         | out contingencies (e.g. "This is near an unstable area, worst
         | case is we write off $###M, but after Y years it breaks even.
         | And the site is better in these other factors than alternative
         | Z over there..."). Is it similar to factoring for geophysical
         | instabilities (e.g. earthquake/tsunami zone) or other risks? Or
         | would this type of event catch you completely offguard? I'm
         | guessing insurance riders specifically exclude these types of
         | risks.
        
           | zipy124 wrote:
           | Insurance. No need to write off anything or take a loss, just
           | a slightly increased yearly cost. The cost of said insurance
           | is likely going to be very high for a long time now though.
        
             | wiml wrote:
             | Sure, but insurance is just outsourcing that calculation to
             | a third party. AWS is big enough that I would think they
             | largely self-insure, though I don't know if they do.
        
         | tiew9Vii wrote:
         | Middle East isn't some 3rd world. If you can imagine futuristic
         | cities, rich Middle East countries are already living in them
         | with all the oil wealth.
         | 
         | They have phones, computers, digital services just like the US
         | and Europe. Makes sense they want a data center in the region,
         | close to them just like the US and Europe have data enters
         | close to their users.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Slight tangent, but to me futuristic cities are actually
           | places like Amsterdam, with cozy streets and bike lanes
           | everywhere, not places like Dubai with 16-lane freeways and a
           | quasi-slave underclass staffing the tacky malls.
        
             | echoangle wrote:
             | If you take futuristic to mean ,,looking like the future",
             | it think the second option is sadly more futuristic for
             | some people
        
               | andrepd wrote:
               | Indeed, but sprawling lead-smoke infested freeways is the
               | stuff of the 1950s; bike lanes and playgrounds and grassy
               | tram tracks is what some cities are starting to do just
               | now! So actually more futuristic, objectively speaking :)
        
             | mlinhares wrote:
             | Its sad that people think the "future" is all about owning
             | stuff for yourself and not what the city can provide to its
             | population.
        
               | FpUser wrote:
               | Why is it said? Being independent to the degree possible
               | is the best state for human being I think.
        
               | patmorgan23 wrote:
               | Do you think we became the dominant species by being
               | independent loners, or by forming complex interdependent
               | groups?
        
               | copperx wrote:
               | I can't imagine the logic chain that made you come to
               | that conclusion.
        
               | tomjakubowski wrote:
               | [delayed]
        
             | b00ty4breakfast wrote:
             | I guess it depends on if you were a Gibson fan or an Asimov
             | fan as a teen
        
             | brcmthrowaway wrote:
             | And yet Amsterdam has a world famous seedy district
        
             | cactusplant7374 wrote:
             | A lot of people don't like bikes. I am down for salty
             | licorice though.
        
           | nutjob2 wrote:
           | If you can imagine dystopian cities, rich Middle East
           | countries are already living in them with all the oil wealth.
        
             | haliskerbas wrote:
             | San Francisco feels the same s/oil/tech/g
        
           | surgical_fire wrote:
           | So... The future is Dubai? I am still to hear a better
           | argument in favor of extinction.
           | 
           | This reminds me of a quote from "Stranger Than Fiction":
           | 
           | > Harold: "I don't want to eat nothing but pancakes, I want
           | to live! I mean, who in their right mind in a choice between
           | pancakes and living chooses pancakes?"
           | 
           | > Dr. Hilbert: "Harold, if you pause to think, you'd realize
           | that that answer is inextricably contingent upon the type of
           | life being led... and, of course, the quality of the
           | pancakes"
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | There's a fair amount of nearby customers. There's decent
         | connectivity via undersea cables to Europe, East Asia, and
         | Africa. UAE, Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are very
         | encouraging of outside investments in their countries.
         | 
         | I did some work with hosts on GCP in the region and you get fun
         | things like hosts in Israel has bad routes to customers in
         | nearby countries and vice versa, though. I don't know if AWS
         | has access to better routing. Definitely a case where physical
         | distance doesn't really correspond with network distance.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Because there are customers there
        
         | someotherperson wrote:
         | Yes, and also pushed for by the Israeli and US governments.
         | Tech investment is part of the Abraham Accords - i.e this is
         | part of the prerequisites for normalization of ties with
         | Israel.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | It's extremely efficient from an evaporative cooling
         | perspective.
        
         | gorgoiler wrote:
         | I was thinking the same thing about cooling. I guess a high
         | pressure heat pump can work in any environment if it compresses
         | a gas up to a temperature that's higher than ambient. Couple
         | that with abundant cheap energy -- sunny, oily, and gassy! --
         | and it doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
        
           | echoangle wrote:
           | You can use a heat pump for any realistic output temperature
           | but the efficiency goes down the higher the temperature
           | difference has to be.
           | 
           | As long as sun and wind aren't the main energy sources there,
           | it might be economical but I wouldn't exactly call it
           | reasonable.
        
         | seany wrote:
         | Data governance compliance is a huge issue for some industries.
         | "The days can't leave the country" will drive AWSs normal
         | customers to demand bespoke regions setup and turned on
        
           | edgarvaldes wrote:
           | Yes, I'm surprised no one else has commented on this. Some
           | regulations require that at least some backups be located in
           | the same country or region.
        
         | uluyol wrote:
         | Electricity? It's probably one of the best places in the world
         | to have a solar+battery installation?
        
         | mememememememo wrote:
         | My guess.
         | 
         | Edge compute. Data (coughlaugh) residency. Obsession with low
         | latency on our 42Mb web pages.
        
         | mbreese wrote:
         | I think the easy answer is: because there are customers there.
         | It's a region full of major commercial and industrial
         | companies. I can imagine that you'd want data centers close to
         | where those customer are.
         | 
         | Technically, I can see challenges in power and cooling, but
         | those can be overcome. The real question is- Are there enough
         | customers in the region to support local data centers? I think
         | that's clearly yes.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | [dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47632503
        
       | bawolff wrote:
       | I do think there is some irony that the Iran war took down all
       | the AWS datacenters in the middle east except the one (or 3 i
       | guess) in Israel, which is still chugging along.
       | 
       | Like as a strategy its kind of weird. Iran plans to force Israel
       | to stop by wrecking the economies of a bunch of countries that
       | are basically frenemies of Israel? I suppose its meant to
       | pressure USA, it just seems like a terrible strategy.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | It's not that they don't want to hit the ones in Israel, it's
         | that they're better defended, and further away.
         | 
         | Bahrain to Iran is ~140 miles. Dubai is ~100 miles. Israel is
         | closer to ~600.
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | No doubt. But it still seems like a bizarre strategy. They
           | can't shoot the people they want so they just shoot these
           | other randoms.
        
             | andrepd wrote:
             | These other "randoms" are US allies which host bases and
             | equipment used to attack them.
             | 
             | In more practical terms, wrecking shit up in places like
             | Dubai that made their name off air travel and attracting
             | "expat" douchebags, is a very effective way to get them to
             | pressure the US to stop the war. So is blowing up oil infra
             | and stopping transit in Hormuz for allied nations.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | AWS isn't an "other random", it's a core piece of American
             | infrastructure, and Bahrain hosts the US Fifth Fleet.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Support_Activity_Bahrai
             | n
             | 
             | Same for Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc.; all
             | host US bases. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-
             | east/us-military-facili...
        
             | lenkite wrote:
             | These randoms not only host U.S. bases supplying logistics
             | for the attacks on Iran, but were are launch pads for
             | missiles https://www.wsj.com/world/iran-war-land-missile-
             | strikes-22ca... until Iran ensured the launch sites were
             | destroyed
             | 
             | "Videos verified by Storyful, which is owned by News Corp,
             | the parent company of The Wall Street Journal, indicate
             | that at least some of the launches came from Bahrain, the
             | tiny kingdom just 125 miles across the Gulf from Iran."
             | 
             | The air bases are still being used as launch pads for drone
             | strikes and chopper missions.
        
             | megous wrote:
             | NY Times doesn't even know what NATO is, while writing a
             | full-page article about it, so yeah this kind of ignorance
             | about where USA has it hands and guns is not surprising,
             | from some random on the internet. ;)
        
             | FpUser wrote:
             | >"They can't shoot the people they want so they just shoot
             | these other randoms."
             | 
             | Same as sanctions. There are many places where they can not
             | tell governments what to do, so they suffocate general
             | population
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | It's supposed to show to regional US allies that the American
         | military cannot really protect them, pushing them to apply
         | pressure to end the war in the short term, and to cool their
         | relationship with the US and Israel in the long term.
         | 
         | It has had some effect; the emirates are desperate to find a
         | way out of this conflict, and various figures have publicly
         | said "the system of alliances [with the US] has worked but
         | needs to be modernized" - i.e. we can't allow Americans to do
         | what they want anymore.
        
           | geraneum wrote:
           | Do Americans do what they want because they are "allowed" by
           | gulf states?
        
             | greggoB wrote:
             | It (normally) has an effect on the military calculus - e.g.
             | if the US weren't allowed to have military bases in these
             | countries, the possibility to take such action seems less
             | plausible.
        
               | geraneum wrote:
               | Correct, but that's not my point. My point is whether the
               | Gulf States can realistically dictate what the US does.
               | Perhaps they can affect US actions, but I doubt it's that
               | cut and dried.
        
             | guerrilla wrote:
             | You need to think that all the way through. The answer is
             | obviously yes. Yemen is a perfect example. Iran is
             | obviously as well. Afghanistan another great case. It is
             | certainly possible to resist US pressure. Iran is asking
             | the gulf countries to do that. Imagine how much better they
             | would all be able to resist the US together as well, better
             | than each alone.
        
               | hunterpayne wrote:
               | The gulf countries hate Iran and have for a very very
               | long time, longer than even the concept of the west has
               | existed. Iran throwing around ballistic missiles is far
               | more like a temper tantrum than a viable military
               | strategy. And its a strategic gift to Trump. Whether
               | he/we can take advantage of that, IDK.
        
               | actionfromafar wrote:
               | I'm not so sure it's a strategic gift for Trump. Before
               | the war (oh, sorry, I meant the "special military
               | operation") everything was largely fine for the Gulf
               | states. Now, it's _not_.
        
               | DANmode wrote:
               | Who is "we", just for reader clarity?
        
               | geraneum wrote:
               | > The answer is obviously yes.
               | 
               | Of course it isn't. In reality, being able to resist
               | requires power. Power that's gained more or less
               | independently such as Iran's. Gulf states should be in a
               | position of power to able to resist US presence. The
               | power they have right now is mostly gained through the
               | help of USA and its allies. It's not the same as Iran.
               | Not even close.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | > Of course it isn't. In reality, being able to resist
               | requires power.
               | 
               | I gave examples of it actually happening. If sandal-
               | wearing Houthis can resist, then well-funded oil states
               | can as well. The Taliban beat the US. In fact, very few
               | people have failed at ejecting the US from the country
               | when they tried if you think back. The US tends to lose a
               | lot.
        
         | AdrianB1 wrote:
         | The data centers in Israel are protected by their AA systems
         | that have more interceptors available than the Emirates. For
         | weeks there are rumors about low stocks of interceptors in the
         | Emirates and Saudi Arabia, while Israel manufactures their own
         | while also getting more from US, so their stocks were probably
         | way higher and replenishment better.
         | 
         | Also the Emirates are in range of short range cheapo drones and
         | Iran build lot of these, while Israel is farther away.
        
         | Barrin92 wrote:
         | it's a good strategy. There's no point in trying to stop Israel
         | by harming them economically because they know perfectly well
         | that like for them, this war is existential. The Gulf states
         | are financial hubs and tourist destinations disguised as
         | countries and so their wealth is a neuralgic point, the Gulf
         | states and also by extension the US actually respond to having
         | their economies wrecked.
        
         | mememememememo wrote:
         | Iron dome.
        
         | surgical_fire wrote:
         | > I do think there is some irony that the Iran war took down
         | all the AWS datacenters in the middle east except the one (or 3
         | i guess) in Israel, which is still chugging along.
         | 
         | ... For now.
         | 
         | > Like as a strategy its kind of weird. Iran plans to force
         | Israel to stop by wrecking the economies of a bunch of
         | countries that are basically frenemies of Israel? I suppose its
         | meant to pressure USA, it just seems like a terrible strategy.
         | 
         | The gulf countries are enemies of Iran. In fact, they are a lot
         | cozier to Israel.
        
       | dmix wrote:
       | Pretty sure this is old news being repackaged
        
       | laweijfmvo wrote:
       | So can Amazon file a claim with the Us government for
       | compensation? Does their insurance cover this? Or do they just
       | eat the loss?
        
         | lschueller wrote:
         | I am anything but a legal expert, but my guess would be that
         | this falls under the aspects of force majeure. Which doesn't
         | mean, that in a couple of years they try to take this to court.
        
         | lokinorkle wrote:
         | No, I'd say they'll get it back with free Iranian oil in a few
         | weeks.
        
         | cypherpunks01 wrote:
         | US gov is not going to reimburse a private company for war
         | damage caused by a sovereign country.
         | 
         | Property insurance generally has war exclusions, insurance co
         | will deny claims. Unless there is some affordable magic 100%
         | war damage coverage policy sold in the middle east, which is
         | doubtful, no insurer would be able to successfully underwrite
         | anything like that.
         | 
         | The company eats the losses and the recovery efforts it wants
         | to persue.
        
       | chasd00 wrote:
       | So are the Azure data centers still up or do the Iranians just
       | assume Azure will take itself offline eventually? Joking but I
       | assume Microsoft (and Google) have a DC presence in the region
       | too.
        
       | ks2048 wrote:
       | Gonna have to update my boto3 code to deal with a new value for
       | instance.state['Name'], "bombed".
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | That's going to put more pressure on RAM chip availability.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-04 23:00 UTC)