Feeds

Report: IBM protests Amazon $600m CIA cloud contract

Amazon: 'We're changing IT!' Big Blue: 'Release the lawyers!'

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

IBM has lawyered-up to protest the CIA's alleged plan to spend $600 million with Amazon Web Services over the next decade.

Big Blue has filed a bid of protest with the government to try and get the CIA to reconsider its decision to spend money on Bezos & Co.'s cloud, according to some diligent muckraking by government IT mag FCW.

The $600m contract was first reported by FCW in March, and should see AWS help the CIA build its own spooky private cloud – that is, a giant pool of infrastructure with a software layer on top that lets the CIA devote all its resources to a single task, or as many tasks as there are CPUs, with a flexible data storage and networking underlay as well.

IBM, being none too happy about this, filed a protest on the contract in Feb 26th, and supplemented the protest with further information three times, with the last protest filed April 11th, according to FCW.

Traditionally, IBM has been the go-to organization for governments with major logistical and IT projects, whether that be building the gear for major US and German censuses, designing some of NASA's compute infrastructure, or creating massive travel-reservation systems.

For a company like Amazon to get this type of contract flies in the face of IBM's corporate strategy, and we reckon could elicit befuddled responses akin to VMware's labelling of Amazon as little more than "a company that sells books".

But the pesky invisible hand of Adam Smith is on Amazon's side, as the cost benefits gained from increasing capacity utilization and having a more uniform non-specialist base of capital components seem to favor AWS-style solutions over those of the build-to-fit IBM specialty.

For this reason, a team of some 25 Morgan Stanley bean counters recently proclaimed that the rise of the AWS cloud represents a severe threat to much of the existing IT industry. This CIA deal is another illustration of how AWS's cloud has upended the traditional IT world.

At the time of writing, neither Amazon or IBM had responded to a request by The Register for information. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Azure TITSUP caused by INFINITE LOOP
Fat fingered geo-block kept Aussies in the dark
NASA launches new climate model at SC14
75 days of supercomputing later ...
Yahoo! blames! MONSTER! email! OUTAGE! on! CUT! CABLE! bungle!
Weekend woe for BT as telco struggles to restore service
You think the CLOUD's insecure? It's BETTER than UK.GOV's DATA CENTRES
We don't even know where some of them ARE – Maude
DEATH by COMMENTS: WordPress XSS vuln is BIGGEST for YEARS
Trio of XSS turns attackers into admins
BOFH: WHERE did this 'fax-enabled' printer UPGRADE come from?
Don't worry about that cable, it's part of the config
Cloud unicorns are extinct so DiData cloud mess was YOUR fault
Applications need to be built to handle TITSUP incidents
Astro-boffins start opening universe simulation data
Got a supercomputer? Want to simulate a universe? Here you go
prev story

Whitepapers

Choosing cloud Backup services
Demystify how you can address your data protection needs in your small- to medium-sized business and select the best online backup service to meet your needs.
Getting started with customer-focused identity management
Learn why identity is a fundamental requirement to digital growth, and how without it there is no way to identify and engage customers in a meaningful way.
10 threats to successful enterprise endpoint backup
10 threats to a successful backup including issues with BYOD, slow backups and ineffective security.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
The hidden costs of self-signed SSL certificates
Exploring the true TCO for self-signed SSL certificates, including a side-by-side comparison of a self-signed architecture versus working with a third-party SSL vendor.