New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I could agree with you IF their SLA wasn't perfectly clear that the uptime provided is 99.9%
This misleading -as it turned out- sentence gives the customer(s) the right to expect exactly that 99.9% or claim a full refund. And this full refund goes on the contract period. So, annually contracts get a full refund even if they were working fine for 11 months and 15 days but then failed for good.
You mean this SLA?
7. DDoS Mitigation
DeluxHost offers best-effort DDoS protection within its infrastructure. Limitations explicitly acknowledged by the customer:
No DDoS mitigation system can guarantee complete protection against every type or volume of attack.
In the event of attacks that exceed the available mitigation capacity, DeluxHost may apply null routing (temporary suspension of traffic to the attacked IP) to maintain the stability of other services.
DeluxHost is not responsible for data loss, service interruptions, or other damages resulting from DDoS attacks or other external actions beyond its control.
Periods of unavailability caused by DDoS attacks that exceed the mitigation capacity are not included in the uptime calculation for SLA purposes.
Thus in short, they have excluded DDoS attacks from their uptime guarantee, which means that you, as a consumer, cannot rely on the failure to honor that promise.
In that regard, they have locked everything down completely through the SLA and their General Terms and Conditions, and their SLA is essentially just a sham.
ssh did not worked
install services did not worked
web services did not worked
If, before buying a washing machine, I see that the manufacturer calmly gives it a 5-year full service guarantee, I know that this machine will last me at least 5 years. If I buy a cheap washing machine for which the manufacturer gives a 1-year warranty period, I understand that this washing machine may be worse than the first option.
When I bought a server here, no one indicated anywhere that the uptime could be less than 90%. If I had been warned about this before the purchase, I might have refused the purchase.
What do you think, at what server availability rates can I request a refund? The current situation is like this. And this is provided that I constantly reboot the server in the panel. If you do not do this, the server itself will not start, and the uptime will be even worse.
Can they call any server failure (including one that is not related to a DDoS attack) a DDoS attack and thus exclude it from the guarantee of uninterrupted operation?
I have had an informational announcement posted in my personal account for several days now:
We would like to inform our customers that the recent DDoS attacks targeting our infrastructure have been successfully mitigated and the situation is currently under control.
So my current server problems have nothing to do with the DDoS attack. Do I understand correctly?
That is correct, but it also has to do with conformity. If you have a washing machine and it breaks down outside the warranty period, you still enjoy some protection. You may expect "some" conformity from an inexpensive device (or service); from a similar device (or service) in the same higher-priced category, you may expect more. In the Netherlands, this is referred to as "useful life" for a product (technical or economic useful life).
In fact, this also applies to a service such as a Dedicated Server, VPS, or hosting.
Legally, you have an obligation to read up on things beforehand and, above all, to ensure you are well-informed. However, what strikes me is that there are contradictory claims being made, and I suspect that DeluxHost could run into some serious trouble with that.
You cannot guarantee 99.9% uptime and then state elsewhere on your website that there are exceptions to this. 'Legally speaking,' these exceptions usually have to be stated directly alongside the mention of the uptime guarantee. With claims like these, you must always state, where applicable, that 'additional terms and conditions apply.' The point here is that the 99.9% uptime is a decisive factor in a consumer's decision to purchase the service.
In this case, it might not even be a matter of lack of conformity, but of deception. And in the case of deception, the law is strict, and by definition, an agreement is voidable. Reading through the General Terms and Conditions briefly, DDoS attacks are not excluded, and there is no explicit reference to the SLA they apply. They simply state plainly that the uptime is 99.9%, but then deviate from it in the fine print of their SLA. This is also known as a prohibited commercial practice.
The downside is that while you may have a valid legal point, the costs for these services are so low that it is not worth making a legal case out of it; what you can certainly do, however, is file a complaint with the regulatory authority. Furthermore, since this 99.9% uptime is a decisive factor in entering into the agreement, it is an agreement concluded under false pretenses, which strengthens the legal basis for the rescission (voiding) of the contract.
You mean the SLA that literally says that you only get a maximum of 20% refunded as balance for the next payment?
Which is not applicable because DDOS's are exempted according article 7 of their SLA.
Yes, but even if, he would be wrong
True...
The only thing that might possibly help people in the EU - as that law protects EU consumers - is what I mentioned in my previous response... dissolving the agreement based on conflicting statements resulting in deception/error, or in other words... unfair commercial practices.
This is based on advertising a 99.9% uptime, which they also state in their General Terms and Conditions without referring to the SLA — in which exceptions occur — which therefore does not form part of the agreement.
Im experiencing exactly same behavior via ssh.
That's nonsence situation.
Still waiting "press release" with situation clarification from DeluxHost
i cant even install any additional package from ubuntu repositories cause vps cant connect to them, lol.
"Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/v/vnstat/vnstat_2.12-1_amd64.deb Could not connect to archive.ubuntu.com:80 (104.20.28.246), connection timed out Could not connect to archive.ubuntu.com:80 (172.66.152.176), connection timed out?"
So, what is the situation at the moment? Is it kind of "we shut off all of your servers until the attack stops?"
I'm in this situation: they promised me something, but nothing happened. The servers aren't working (I paid for them). My money was ultimately stolen, and they're not fulfilling their promises.
I can't get my money back, and I can't get the servers.
Partially true. The regulations are mostly for the telecommunication services you mention. However, the statutory duty to provide goes for more services and basically is "you should get what you've paid for". It's easy with other subscription models like a magazine, but with a service-type thing most of them that know the law use the same calculation rule. I've seen quite some hosting providers using the same method.
If a provider promises 99,9% uptime, you can expect a 99,9% uptime. What you're saying about cost: I can expect a lot more from the service of a Rolls Royce Phantom, but if the Fiat Panda I'm having doesn't drive, they're obliged to do the same thing by law.
Had that situation with a friend who had to go the legal way. His 299 washing machine broke down after exactly 2 years. The company said "too bad, cheap machine, expected life is 2 years". After the legal way he got 100% of his money returned.
It'd be way cheaper for that company to just say "OK, we'll fix it or you'll get some compensation" - and this is exactly what my point is regarding this VPS issue: be clever and think about reputation more than about what you think your rights are as a provider.
You can say whatever you want in your SLA; if the law says otherwise, that part of your SLA is void. And be aware you have to provide proof that you've done everything you can to prevent or withstand that attack - and that's quite difficult in many cases.
A day has passed, and the company's official representative hasn't responded. The tickets are silent. I see this as money theft.
Can the forum administration somehow influence this?
Unfortunately, in this forum, when we buy a vps from a new provider, we actually take a gamble. If it turns out fine, we are happy. If it turns out bad we are just unlucky and move on. This way I got few good machines and some bad ones. I keep the good ones and i drop the rest. Now regarding the money situation, if Deluxhost will be willing to refund all people who will request it at some point, I don't know. Just wait and see where all this will lead.
So it turns out they simply stole the money without providing the services paid for.
And we can only hope they'll at least write something someday. Right?