Not in such a primitive fashion no. But they could definitely have a secondary network that will continue to work even if something goes wrong with the primary.
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 22:16, PJ Capelli <pjcape...@pm.me> wrote: > Seems unlikely that FB internal controls would allow such a backdoor ... > > "Never to get lost, is not living" - Rebecca Solnit > > Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email. > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Monday, October 4th, 2021 at 4:12 PM, Baldur Norddahl < > baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 21:58, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > >> >> On 10/4/21 11:48 AM, Luke Guillory wrote: >> >> >> I believe the original change was 'automatic' (as in configuration done >> via a web interface). However, now that connection to the outside world is >> down, remote access to those tools don't exist anymore, so the emergency >> procedure is to gain physical access to the peering routers and do all the >> configuration locally. >> >> Assuming that this is what actually happened, what should fb have done >> different (beyond the obvious of not screwing up the immediate issue)? This >> seems like it's a single point of failure. Should all of the BGP speakers >> have been dual homed or something like that? Or should they not have been >> mixing ops and production networks? Sorry if this sounds dumb. >> > > Facebook is a huge network. It is doubtful that what is going on is this > simple. So I will make no guesses to what Facebook is or should be doing. > > However the traditional way for us small timers is to have a backdoor > using someone else's network. Nowadays this could be a simple 4/5G router > with a VPN, to a terminal server that allows the operator to configure the > equipment through the monitor port even when the config is completely > destroyed. > > Regards, > > Baldur > > > > > >
