TIL that Microsoft is the least Israel-friendly of the big three clouds:
> Among the cloud giants, Microsoft is considered the most vulnerable to anti-Israel protests and allegations of the use made by the Ministry of Defense on Azure, its cloud platforms, since it is the only company among the three major cloud companies that has not signed a special agreement with the Israeli government and the Ministry of Defense. The industry says that Haimovich, who is known as a prominent salesman with the government sector, was appointed country general manager, among other things, due to Microsoft's plans to retain and increase business with the government sector, despite not winning the Nimbus tender.
> In 2021, Israel awarded Amazon and Google the Nimbus cloud tender, encouraging government bodies and public organizations to migrate to these services, at the expense of Microsoft. In return, Amazon and Google pledged to establish service areas in data centers on Israeli soil, in order to avoid exposing security or government data to foreign regulation.
> TIL that Microsoft is the least Israel-friendly of the big three clouds
This is a good thing.
American companies should not be allowing their tech to be used to in the gross ongoing human rights violations in Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
Google and Amazon knew their tech could be used for human rights abuses in Israel (their lawyers warned them so) but ignored that in favour of $$$ per the EFF:
Yeah but when you read the article it comes across less like 'Microsoft doesn't want its services used for ethics violations' and more 'The unethical genocide Israel is doing uses some servers in the EU exposing Microsoft to legal and regulatory issues'.
IOW this isn't an ethical or moral stance against what the Ministry of Defense was doing, it's purely because they could potentially get in trouble with the EU for abetting the genocide.
> Yeah but when you read the article it comes across less like 'Microsoft doesn't want its services used for ethics violations' and more 'The unethical genocide Israel is doing uses some servers in the EU exposing Microsoft to legal and regulatory issues'.
You are incorrect. Microsoft has made clear that it is related to all of its Azure services that were misused with regards to its terms of services, not just those in Europe.
Here is Microsoft's original statement when it began this investigation:
"The Guardian, on that date, reported that multiple individuals have asserted that the IDF is using Azure for the storage of data files of phone calls obtained through broad or mass surveillance of civilians in Gaza and the West Bank. Microsoft’s standard terms of service prohibit this type of usage."
Ok, so The Guardian was incomplete in its assumptions. But Microsoft's explanation also does not make sense - see how they have to support any war waged by the US government. They would have had to support the Vietnam war, if were were in that era back. Something does not add up here still.
> see how they have to support any war waged by the US government. They would have had to support the Vietnam war, if were were in that era back. Something does not add up here still.
I am so confused by these statements. Microsoft and other private companies do not have to knowingly violate human rights in the service of the US government whether it is war or not.
Agreed, but then Germany is also to be held liable as it supports Israel and allows the USA to use its bases there to bomb people in far-away countries. So there is a huge inconsistency here, IMHO.
> then Germany is also to be held liable as it supports Israel
Yup you are correct. In parallel to the ICJ genocide case of South Africa v Israel, there is a case against Germany for its action in support of Israel on that exact topic:
> American companies should not be allowing their tech to be used to in the gross ongoing human rights violations in Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
Fully agreed, but also a hard sell given that America itself does not recognize what is happening there as a genocide.
Something something man understanding depending on his salary.
Americans only give a shit about the price of gas and eggs. Whoever has to die to keep those down is apparently fine with the majority of our population.
> Fully agreed, but also a hard sell given that America itself does not recognize what is happening there as a genocide.
This has nothing to do with a declaration of genocide. Both Amazon and Google respectively have made commitments to not enable human rights violations:
Well clearly they didn't mean much, which is about what I expect from any corporate policy declaration such as. If you believed them anyway, congratulations on having far more faith in corporations than I do.
In what dimension do you mean? Legally? Yes, unless based out of a place with an anti-BDS law. Politically? Sure, it's a bet against those currently in power and for the sentiment in the population. Practically? Yes, they can refuse business and contracts. I suppose they could also put killswitches in their hardware/software, but I wouldn't be a fan of that for digital-rights reasons. Economically? Who knows, the market makes no sense at all currently. They could probably get away with whatever.
They're trying to spy on everyone in the mideast and the world, including Americans. Israel is a dangerous rogue state that should be eliminated entirely. Let the Palestinians take over Israel and let them decide what to do with the Israeli people.
This is a very bad look for Microsoft. Israel is the only successful and powerful free democratic state in that part of the world, surrounded on all sides by authoritarian regimes who scheme its destruction, and Microsoft harrumphs and says it would be unethical to do business with them? All the while continuing to do business with the Saudis, the UAE, and Qatar. But no, Israel (the only good guy in the area) is just a step too far…
No, it's just a random coin toss. Most of what's happening with rich people becoming psychotic or anti-social is simply greed based. You add money to 70% of the population and they'll turn out to be an asshole.
If Microsoft was given more attention by AIPAC or it's billionaires, it would've been the same.
Watching the rise of fascism in america should really remind everyone that theres far more going on then a single idiot driving far right fascism.
For those that do not know, this is part of the fallout of this Microsoft investigation from 2025 into the misuse of Azure services in Israel for military purposes:
> In September 2025, Microsoft decided to unilaterally terminate the usage agreement with IDF intelligence Unit 8200 after an article published in the UK newspaper "The Guardian," which claimed that the unit was collecting information about Palestinians for the purpose of fighting terrorism
Ok but ... isn't Microsoft forced, by law, to cooperate with the US government and US military? So why is that then not an ethical (or other) issue?
To me this seems inconsistent. The only "necessity" I see is for Microsoft to be penalised by EU laws, which could explain that "investigation" to some extent. But the EU in general is super-weak. They even give data from EU citizens to the US government as-is, without any problem, so I don't quite buy into that explanation. Is there another explanation that makes more sense?
Israel consistently flaunts international law, has been accused of war crimes by the Hague, and the UN has found it most likely has committed and continues to commit genocide in Gaza. So I am not surprised that dealing with the country's Defense apparatus would lead to ethical concerns. Every international company should think twice about doing business with the Israeli government or companies rooted in defense and cybersecurity.
>> Alon Haimovich is leaving after an investigation into alleged unethical use of Azure by the Ministry of Defense, “Globes” has learned. Microsoft Israel has been placed under the management of Microsoft France.
Israel has been leaking US state secrets to China and Russia for decades. Intel and Microsoft both moved core R&D hubs to Israel even after the country had been caught leaking US secrets. Israel is not an ally of the United States, end of story.
I assume you don't have any credible source for these claims. You are just posting a modern version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Antisemitism ia not ok.
I love reading on hacker news,
but every once in a while I get reminded what detathed people there is here.
You truly know shit about everything other than you see on your screens eh
Why? Microsoft probably just hasn’t prioritized nimbus participation over their other construction work. They probably haven’t yet constructed the correct subsidiary structure or key sharing agreements that allow them to participate either.
Sooner or later they’ll participate. And then you would have moved your workload for no reason.
The reason cited for this whole fiasco is that some of the Ministry of Defense's genocide work could be performed by servers in the EU, which could expose Microsoft to legal or regulatory issues.
It's not that Microsoft was against this, it's that Microsoft was against themselves getting in trouble for this with the EU.
TIL that Microsoft is the least Israel-friendly of the big three clouds:
> Among the cloud giants, Microsoft is considered the most vulnerable to anti-Israel protests and allegations of the use made by the Ministry of Defense on Azure, its cloud platforms, since it is the only company among the three major cloud companies that has not signed a special agreement with the Israeli government and the Ministry of Defense. The industry says that Haimovich, who is known as a prominent salesman with the government sector, was appointed country general manager, among other things, due to Microsoft's plans to retain and increase business with the government sector, despite not winning the Nimbus tender.
> In 2021, Israel awarded Amazon and Google the Nimbus cloud tender, encouraging government bodies and public organizations to migrate to these services, at the expense of Microsoft. In return, Amazon and Google pledged to establish service areas in data centers on Israeli soil, in order to avoid exposing security or government data to foreign regulation.
> TIL that Microsoft is the least Israel-friendly of the big three clouds
This is a good thing.
American companies should not be allowing their tech to be used to in the gross ongoing human rights violations in Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
Google and Amazon knew their tech could be used for human rights abuses in Israel (their lawyers warned them so) but ignored that in favour of $$$ per the EFF:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/google-and-amazon-ackn...
Yeah but when you read the article it comes across less like 'Microsoft doesn't want its services used for ethics violations' and more 'The unethical genocide Israel is doing uses some servers in the EU exposing Microsoft to legal and regulatory issues'.
IOW this isn't an ethical or moral stance against what the Ministry of Defense was doing, it's purely because they could potentially get in trouble with the EU for abetting the genocide.
> Yeah but when you read the article it comes across less like 'Microsoft doesn't want its services used for ethics violations' and more 'The unethical genocide Israel is doing uses some servers in the EU exposing Microsoft to legal and regulatory issues'.
You are incorrect. Microsoft has made clear that it is related to all of its Azure services that were misused with regards to its terms of services, not just those in Europe.
Here is Microsoft's original statement when it began this investigation:
"The Guardian, on that date, reported that multiple individuals have asserted that the IDF is using Azure for the storage of data files of phone calls obtained through broad or mass surveillance of civilians in Gaza and the West Bank. Microsoft’s standard terms of service prohibit this type of usage."
https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/05/15/stateme...
Ok, so The Guardian was incomplete in its assumptions. But Microsoft's explanation also does not make sense - see how they have to support any war waged by the US government. They would have had to support the Vietnam war, if were were in that era back. Something does not add up here still.
> see how they have to support any war waged by the US government. They would have had to support the Vietnam war, if were were in that era back. Something does not add up here still.
I am so confused by these statements. Microsoft and other private companies do not have to knowingly violate human rights in the service of the US government whether it is war or not.
https://www.justsecurity.org/113820/us-corporate-interests-h...
https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-l...
Agreed, but then Germany is also to be held liable as it supports Israel and allows the USA to use its bases there to bomb people in far-away countries. So there is a huge inconsistency here, IMHO.
> then Germany is also to be held liable as it supports Israel
Yup you are correct. In parallel to the ICJ genocide case of South Africa v Israel, there is a case against Germany for its action in support of Israel on that exact topic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._Germany
Yeah this is exactly it. Europe is no longer friendly with Israel.
It makes Americans seethe with rage ofcourse- only Americans are allowed to put pressure on corporations.
> American companies should not be allowing their tech to be used to in the gross ongoing human rights violations in Israel/Gaza/West Bank.
Fully agreed, but also a hard sell given that America itself does not recognize what is happening there as a genocide.
Something something man understanding depending on his salary.
Americans only give a shit about the price of gas and eggs. Whoever has to die to keep those down is apparently fine with the majority of our population.
> Fully agreed, but also a hard sell given that America itself does not recognize what is happening there as a genocide.
This has nothing to do with a declaration of genocide. Both Amazon and Google respectively have made commitments to not enable human rights violations:
https://sustainability.aboutamazon.com/human-rights/principl...
https://about.google/company-info/human-rights/
Well clearly they didn't mean much, which is about what I expect from any corporate policy declaration such as. If you believed them anyway, congratulations on having far more faith in corporations than I do.
Like... all of us 300 million plus? Thanks dude.
> American companies should not be allowing their tech to ...
Do they have a choice?
In what dimension do you mean? Legally? Yes, unless based out of a place with an anti-BDS law. Politically? Sure, it's a bet against those currently in power and for the sentiment in the population. Practically? Yes, they can refuse business and contracts. I suppose they could also put killswitches in their hardware/software, but I wouldn't be a fan of that for digital-rights reasons. Economically? Who knows, the market makes no sense at all currently. They could probably get away with whatever.
I’m kind of confused, in that Israel is not that big in terms of population, about 10 million people; how much data and cloud do they need?
The state of Pennsylvania is 13 million; would MSFT losing PA do them serious financial damage?
They're trying to spy on everyone in the mideast and the world, including Americans. Israel is a dangerous rogue state that should be eliminated entirely. Let the Palestinians take over Israel and let them decide what to do with the Israeli people.
We have already seen in Oct 7 what happens when you let palestinians take over. I'm sure you're ok with that, I'm not.
This is a very bad look for Microsoft. Israel is the only successful and powerful free democratic state in that part of the world, surrounded on all sides by authoritarian regimes who scheme its destruction, and Microsoft harrumphs and says it would be unethical to do business with them? All the while continuing to do business with the Saudis, the UAE, and Qatar. But no, Israel (the only good guy in the area) is just a step too far…
That must explain why the "least" friendly MSFT asked the FBI to spy on employees attending pro-Gaza/anti-genocide protests:
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/microsof...
Good grief. Let's maybe not parrot out nation state propaganda with zero critical thinking on what's being said.
Of course. Instead let’s call TikTok propaganda “critical thinking”, virtue signal and be content how “smart” and “moral” we are.
Is it because it is the most "woke"? Weren't they doing land acknowledgments before some big press event?
No, it's just a random coin toss. Most of what's happening with rich people becoming psychotic or anti-social is simply greed based. You add money to 70% of the population and they'll turn out to be an asshole.
If Microsoft was given more attention by AIPAC or it's billionaires, it would've been the same.
Watching the rise of fascism in america should really remind everyone that theres far more going on then a single idiot driving far right fascism.
Being anti-Israel is a bipartisan position in the US among the constituents but not among the representatives (yet)
There's bipartisan consensus among both constituents and representatives. They're just the opposite consensus.
For those that do not know, this is part of the fallout of this Microsoft investigation from 2025 into the misuse of Azure services in Israel for military purposes:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/09/microsoft-blo...
Too little too late.
> In September 2025, Microsoft decided to unilaterally terminate the usage agreement with IDF intelligence Unit 8200 after an article published in the UK newspaper "The Guardian," which claimed that the unit was collecting information about Palestinians for the purpose of fighting terrorism
Ok but ... isn't Microsoft forced, by law, to cooperate with the US government and US military? So why is that then not an ethical (or other) issue?
To me this seems inconsistent. The only "necessity" I see is for Microsoft to be penalised by EU laws, which could explain that "investigation" to some extent. But the EU in general is super-weak. They even give data from EU citizens to the US government as-is, without any problem, so I don't quite buy into that explanation. Is there another explanation that makes more sense?
Israel consistently flaunts international law, has been accused of war crimes by the Hague, and the UN has found it most likely has committed and continues to commit genocide in Gaza. So I am not surprised that dealing with the country's Defense apparatus would lead to ethical concerns. Every international company should think twice about doing business with the Israeli government or companies rooted in defense and cybersecurity.
What exactly did he do?
Allowed 'unethical' usage of Azure services by the Ministry of Defense
(...to occur on servers in the European Union, where Microsoft could get in trouble for it)
>> Alon Haimovich is leaving after an investigation into alleged unethical use of Azure by the Ministry of Defense, “Globes” has learned. Microsoft Israel has been placed under the management of Microsoft France.
Israel has been leaking US state secrets to China and Russia for decades. Intel and Microsoft both moved core R&D hubs to Israel even after the country had been caught leaking US secrets. Israel is not an ally of the United States, end of story.
I assume you don't have any credible source for these claims. You are just posting a modern version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Antisemitism ia not ok.
I love reading on hacker news, but every once in a while I get reminded what detathed people there is here. You truly know shit about everything other than you see on your screens eh
I don't think all of HN are like that, it's just the antisemites are louder.
So Israel is switching to Google and Amazon. Hm.
Lovely, but in character, to see a .co.il 403-block a broad swath of the world.
Okay, now I will be supporting Azure products and will try to bring them into my workplace over AWS/Google Cloud.
Why? Microsoft probably just hasn’t prioritized nimbus participation over their other construction work. They probably haven’t yet constructed the correct subsidiary structure or key sharing agreements that allow them to participate either.
Sooner or later they’ll participate. And then you would have moved your workload for no reason.
I wouldn't be so sure. The departure of these guys only opens new room for less 'pro-ethics' corpos to replace them.
The reason cited for this whole fiasco is that some of the Ministry of Defense's genocide work could be performed by servers in the EU, which could expose Microsoft to legal or regulatory issues.
It's not that Microsoft was against this, it's that Microsoft was against themselves getting in trouble for this with the EU.