[willvarfar]

People choose managed services all the time.

If you worry about interception, then code inspection and monitoring isn't going to give you any assurances. You'd have to run open-source software locally, audit it, and not put it on a cloud like Azure in the first place?

(And the NSAKEY was something completely different if you dig into it.)

[badminton1]

Using a service means trusting a service. Nothing wrong with either, it's a decision up to the consumer.

I am just saying, in this specific case, should you trust Microsoft with your data? That's all.

[itaysk]

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/TrustCenter/Privacy/default....

If you don't trust MS you can trust one of the organisations that certified them for the strictest compliance and regulations in the public cloud space.

[badminton1]

Sounds good. But how do you exactly verify those claims? Again, you can't. You are back to square 1: trusting Microsoft acts in good faith and acts in your best interest.

[EpicEng]

How do you verify that a doctor is making the right call re how to treat your cancer? You either become a doctor yourself, or trust that they know what they're doing.

[badminton1]

And what if a doctor has a controversial reputation?

[EpicEng]

Then you can make a decision to go with another doctor. Are you questioning the reputation of the auditors, or just writing off MS across the board?

[willvarfar]

Well, do you trust Amazon, Google, Oracle or Rackspace? How about your local mum pop hosting provider? How is Microsoft different?

[badminton1]

A track record of backdooring everything that can be backdoored.