You are ignoring the vastly more likely 5) he wiped a test machine that lacked relevant information or 6) he wiped a new machine that had no data from him or his company.
If you break something, starting over and not doing the same thing is often a vastly better than trying to debug what happened and then fixing it.
I think he's too clever for his own good. This machine should have been considered beyond salvage, remove any precious data (you did have a backup, didn't you?) and re-image. I've had to recover data from hacked boxes a few times for 'brand new customers' and the first thing I do with a system like that is to make sure I get a console wired up and the uplink disconnected. No point in taking chances.
Um, so doesn't his workflow buy an essentially infinite maintenance problem with all his containers? This sounds like tomorrow's Node left-pad debacle in a different form.
He did have a backup. Having it also be mysteriously borked certainly violates the principle of least surprise.
That's a bug like Fukushima is an industrial accident.
reply