OpenCyber AcademyLesson map
Lesson 10. Map, example, EX056.
flowchart TD
P["Three public responsibility pages"] --> U["The provider name is unrecorded"]
C["Customer-side sharing setting"] --> F["The filter reads that setting"]
U --> Q{"May one vendor diagram be pasted as Oakfield's contract?"}
Q -->|No| K["Leave the provider unnamed"]
The split is cited. The party is not identified.
Logical drawing
recorded services: storage, email, hosted booking platform
recorded hardware: the clinic owns no servers
not recorded: which provider, which region, which ticket
Learning outcomes
After this chapter, you should be able to:
- Place the sharing mistake on the customer side of the cited pages.
- Leave Oakfield's provider unnamed.
- Refuse a service-model score and a lock-in measurement.
10.1 Three public pages, and no named supplier.
The references include the Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud descriptions of shared responsibility. Each page draws a split between provider infrastructure and customer configuration. The manuscript never says which of those firms hosts Oakfield. Pasting one diagram into the note would invent a contracting party.
What the clinic recorded is enough for the split it actually used. The storage setting was chosen inside the clinic's account. Changing it did not require a repair of the provider's platform. Email and the hosted booking platform are the other two services in the inventory. None of the three is given a NIST service-model label in the file. SP 800-145 defines cloud computing and also distinguishes service models; this book uses the definition and does not print a model assignment for those three services.
Armbrust and colleagues (2010) discuss confidentiality and lock-in among the obstacles of cloud computing. Oakfield did not measure either obstacle. Deleting one old archive is not a portability test. No ticket number and no region are on the page.
10.2 Worked example
Lesson table; scroll horizontally to read all columns →
| Added sentence | Problem | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| The sharing setting is the clinic's control | Matches the cited split | May stay |
| "Oakfield's contract is the AWS diagram." | The provider is unnamed | Reject |
| "SP 800-145 scored the email service as SaaS." | No model label was stored | Reject |
| "Lock-in was measured when the zip was deleted." | Armbrust is not this log | Reject |
Synthetic case. The three provider pages stay references. They are not a purchase record.
Errors and limits
Do not file a complaint against an unnamed platform for a setting the account holder chose.
Apply
- EX056 — Unnamed provider. A leaving note names one of the three vendors as Oakfield's host, assigns SaaS to the email service, and calls the zip deletion a lock-in measurement. What may the note keep?
Show marking criteria
Rubric: 3 = reject the vendor, the service-model label, and the lock-in claim; the sharing mistake stays on the clinic's side; the three services stay storage, email, and the hosted platform; the clinic owns no servers;; 2 = reject the invented contract and keep the split;; 1 = one rejection;; 0 = none.