<p>In terms of S3, for increased durability, consider <a href="https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/replication.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">cross region replication</a> as an option if you want to increase the durability. AWS also provides their AWS Backup service you might investigate. I'm not certain of any benefit to transferring large amounts of data for durability to another provider. You'll pay a lot more for transfer, and it won't be integrated first class with the security IAM provides.</p>

<p>If the concern is about someone maliciously doing something then there are security best practices, access logging, cloudtrail, and other options to provide assurance. If it's more about the possibility (as low as it seems) for a bucket to fail, then the cross-region replication might be a great option for you with minimal configuration impact.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-11T08:35:17.377Z
2020-02-11T08:35:17.377Z
sheldonhull
<p>You can take backup of s3 using Amazon, other cloud services like google and local system.</p>

<ul>
<li>Local system</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
  <p>S3 Browser comes with a simple Folder Sync Tool allowing you to upload or download only new and changed files and thereby significantly optimize your bandwidth usage and save you time when performing backups to Amazon S3.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This very good tool if your using window. here is the link <a href="http://s3browser.com/amazon-s3-folder-sync.aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://s3browser.com/amazon-s3-folder-sync.aspx</a>
if you using Linux based system then i tired this tool also good one <a href="http://www.s3-client.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">DragonDisk</a></p>

<ul>
<li>cloud-based backup</li>
</ul>

<p>you can take backup of s3 in google cloud as well.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The gsutil command-line tool also enables you to transfer data between Cloud Storage and other locations. While you can use gsutil to work with Amazon S3 buckets and transfer data from Amazon S3 to Google Cloud Storage, Storage Transfer Service is recommended for this use case.</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>AWS</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
  <p>As with any environments, the best practice is to have a backup and to put in place safeguards against malicious or accidental users errors. For S3 data, that best practice includes secure access permissions, Cross-Region Replication, versioning and a functioning, regularly tested backup.</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>How durable is Amazon S3?</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
  <p>Amazon S3 Standard and Standard - IA are designed to provide
  99.999999999% durability of objects over a given year. This durability level corresponds to an average annual expected loss of 0.000000001%
  of objects. For example, if you store 10,000 objects with Amazon S3,
  you can on average expect to incur a loss of a single object once
  every 10,000,000 years. In addition, Amazon S3 is designed to sustain
  the concurrent loss of data in two facilities.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://aws.amazon.com/s3/faqs/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://aws.amazon.com/s3/faqs/</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-12T08:35:02.963Z
Thanks for the information, but this does not answer the actual question being asked :)
Kyle Steenkamp
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-11T17:27:52.147Z
In a corporate setting, it does not matter how reliable S3 itself is, it is still one service at one provider. One engineer with access can easily drop the entire bucket and you can lose hundreds of TB of data literally overnight with no recovery. It is a single point of failure.
Jiri Klouda
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-11T17:19:37.067Z
2017-10-11T17:19:37.067Z
Adiii
<p>AWS Datasync service will be a great way to sync S3, EFS or FSx data from AWS to another location. You can deploy the agent on a VM in Azure or GCP and then use their storage solution to receive the data from AWS. Obviously you will need to look at charges for outbound data transfer but if you have a strong business case for doing this then the costs should not be a problem.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-15T23:41:00.927Z
2020-02-15T23:41:00.927Z
MonkeyMagic
<p>I would like to know how everyone is making external backups of <strong>S3</strong> buckets and best practices/recommendations for this. Regardless of how good <strong>AWS</strong> is it is still a single point of failure.</p>

<p>Especially on a more corporate scale, vast amounts of buckets that are very large.</p>

<p>The <strong>S3</strong> buckets functionality seems to be very limited.</p>

<p><strong>My resolution was the following</strong>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The way I'm looking at doing this now is by downloading the data to an external server (<strong>bare-metal</strong> as <strong>EC2</strong> instance is a lot more expensive) and then pushing that to my backups provider.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T16:33:28.903Z
Have you looked into Amazon's Glacier service? When combined with AWS Lambda, you can create a very cost efficient backup service at the cost of the time to access a backup.
Preston Martin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-11T15:07:30.243Z
What is the actual problem that you're trying to solve? Is it cost, need for additional reliability, do you want to recover from an all-regions failure, or something else?
kdgregory
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-11T15:11:51.270Z
Short answer, though, is that yes, downloading and uploading is your only option. S3 is intended to be a destination for data, not a waypoint. Depending on how much data you have and how frequently you want to move it (and why), there may be different "best" approaches (and be aware that there may be [a charge for data transfer](https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/#Data_Transfer_Pricing)).
kdgregory
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-12T08:43:21.183Z
@kdgregory yes, I see that this the only way of doing it and I have resolved the issue as per the third line in my question. Leaving this open to see what other people recommend.
Kyle Steenkamp
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-13T23:37:12.883Z
Well, unless you explain _why_ you want to do this (see my first comment), I suspect you won't get very good answers.
kdgregory
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-13T16:50:41.623Z
It is just to have an external backup as opposed to having everything just on S3, which is a single point of failure.
Kyle Steenkamp
<amazon-s3><storage><backup><disaster-recovery-plans>
Best practices for external backups for S3 buckets?
Kyle Steenkamp
# Best practices for external backups for S3 buckets?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-10-09)

I would like to know how everyone is making external backups of **S3** buckets and best practices/recommendations for this. Regardless of how good **AWS** is it is still a single point of failure.

Especially on a more corporate scale, vast amounts of buckets that are very large.

The **S3** buckets functionality seems to be very limited.

**My resolution was the following**:

> The way I'm looking at doing this now is by downloading the data to an external server (**bare-metal** as **EC2** instance is a lot more expensive) and then pushing that to my backups provider.

**Tags:** amazon-s3, storage, backup, disaster-recovery-plans

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Have you looked into Amazon's Glacier service? When combined with AWS Lambda, you can create a very cost efficient backup service at the cost of the time to access a backup.  
> **username_2**: What is the actual problem that you're trying to solve? Is it cost, need for additional reliability, do you want to recover from an all-regions failure, or something else?  
> **username_2**: Short answer, though, is that yes, downloading and uploading is your only option. S3 is intended to be a destination for data, not a waypoint. Depending on how much data you have and how frequently you want to move it (and why), there may be different "best" approaches (and be aware that there may be [a charge for data transfer](https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/#Data_Transfer_Pricing)).  
> **username_0**: @username_2 yes, I see that this the only way of doing it and I have resolved the issue as per the third line in my question. Leaving this open to see what other people recommend.  
> **username_2**: Well, unless you explain _why_ you want to do this (see my first comment), I suspect you won't get very good answers.  
> **username_0**: It is just to have an external backup as opposed to having everything just on S3, which is a single point of failure.  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-02-11. Score: 1

In terms of S3, for increased durability, consider [cross region replication](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/replication.html) as an option if you want to increase the durability. AWS also provides their AWS Backup service you might investigate. I'm not certain of any benefit to transferring large amounts of data for durability to another provider. You'll pay a lot more for transfer, and it won't be integrated first class with the security IAM provides.

If the concern is about someone maliciously doing something then there are security best practices, access logging, cloudtrail, and other options to provide assurance. If it's more about the possibility (as low as it seems) for a bucket to fail, then the cross-region replication might be a great option for you with minimal configuration impact.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2017-10-11. Score: 0

You can take backup of s3 using Amazon, other cloud services like google and local system.

* Local system

> S3 Browser comes with a simple Folder Sync Tool allowing you to upload or download only new and changed files and thereby significantly optimize your bandwidth usage and save you time when performing backups to Amazon S3.

This very good tool if your using window. here is the link <http://s3browser.com/amazon-s3-folder-sync.aspx>
if you using Linux based system then i tired this tool also good one [DragonDisk](http://www.s3-client.com/)

* cloud-based backup

you can take backup of s3 in google cloud as well.

> The gsutil command-line tool also enables you to transfer data between Cloud Storage and other locations. While you can use gsutil to work with Amazon S3 buckets and transfer data from Amazon S3 to Google Cloud Storage, Storage Transfer Service is recommended for this use case.

* AWS

> As with any environments, the best practice is to have a backup and to put in place safeguards against malicious or accidental users errors. For S3 data, that best practice includes secure access permissions, Cross-Region Replication, versioning and a functioning, regularly tested backup.

* How durable is Amazon S3?

> Amazon S3 Standard and Standard - IA are designed to provide
> 99.999999999% durability of objects over a given year. This durability level corresponds to an average annual expected loss of 0.000000001%
> of objects. For example, if you store 10,000 objects with Amazon S3,
> you can on average expect to incur a loss of a single object once
> every 10,000,000 years. In addition, Amazon S3 is designed to sustain
> the concurrent loss of data in two facilities.

<https://aws.amazon.com/s3/faqs/>

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks for the information, but this does not answer the actual question being asked :)  
> **username_5**: In a corporate setting, it does not matter how reliable S3 itself is, it is still one service at one provider. One engineer with access can easily drop the entire bucket and you can lose hundreds of TB of data literally overnight with no recovery. It is a single point of failure.  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-02-15. Score: 0

AWS Datasync service will be a great way to sync S3, EFS or FSx data from AWS to another location. You can deploy the agent on a VM in Azure or GCP and then use their storage solution to receive the data from AWS. Obviously you will need to look at charges for outbound data transfer but if you have a strong business case for doing this then the costs should not be a problem.


---

