[yunolisten]

> No, because most self-hosted services are 10-20x cheaper than comparable SaaS offerings.

This has nothing to do with the fact that it could be hit by a botnet, as per the exact point I commented on, could 'wreck your card', it's simply a question of scale.

[kuschku]

No. Most self-hosted services have no bandwidth costs, at all.

Or they have bandwidth costs around a dollar per terabyte. Which, even when maxing your connections, would always be below your actual server costs.

[yunolisten]

If you read the fine print of the ones with "no bandwidth costs" you'll find that service becomes throttled after a certain level of usage. These are businesses, they have to make money to operate, they're not in this for charity

[kuschku]

Dude, I’ve used 180 TB of traffic in one month on a 16$/mo server, and still, no throttling.

I’ve read the fine print, and called them.

Online, Scaleway, OVH, do not ever throttle you.

Hetzner requires you to buy traffic, but there it costs 1$ per 1TB of traffic, which is 1000x cheaper than Firebase.

[yunolisten]

> Dude, I’ve used 180 TB of traffic in one month on a 16$/mo server, and still, no throttling.

But legitimately using lots of bandwidth isn't the same as a DoS attack. Try and remember that bandwidth isn't the only resource being used.

> Scaleway

In my experience they throttle your CPU usage after a while.

> Hetzner requires you to buy traffic, but there it costs 1$ per 1TB of traffic, which is 1000x cheaper than Firebase.

At no point did I suggest using Firebase was a good idea. I said it's always cheaper to run your own services in the long run, and that they'd have found out their own problems (see my first reply) sooner.

[kuschku]

But my point is that you won't even ever have an issue with overusing traffic or CPU during a DoS, and the issue will be purely that your bandwidth will be saturated.

Vs. AWS, Firebase, etc where your limit will be your bank account instead.