Backup & Restore no longer on AWS S3 customer accounts

Question

Dear Forum, dear Atlassian,

I have to ask a question that is currently relevant to us: why has the option to save backups in your own AWS account been discontinued? The feature was so good that we promoted it to customers and now it is no longer available.

I can no longer describe Atlassian's business model as customer-friendly. Rather, it is working against partners and customers.
I would like to understand: so why cut all the good features and flood us with useless stuff?

Best regards

Dirk

Daria Kulikova_GitProtect.io · Answer

Hi @Dirk Küver-Christen ,

It's completely understandable your concern here, especially if this capability was something you relied on and recommended to customers. Being able to store backups in your own S3 bucket is not just a convenience feature; for many organizations, it can be an important part of security, compliance, and data ownership strategies.

Unfortunately, only Atlassian can explain the reasoning behind removing the option to use your own AWS storage.

In situations where organizations need full control over backup location and retention, some teams explore alternative approaches, such as third-party backup solutions that allow storing backups in their own infrastructure. This can help maintain existing compliance or internal policy requirements when native options are limited.

There’s also a good article on the Atlassian Community about the importance of backup practices, one of which is storage control: https://community.atlassian.com/forums/App-Central-articles/Jira-Regular-Backups-and-Issue-History-Tracking-Must-Haves-to/ba-p/2651784

Arkadiusz Wroblewski · Answer

@Dirk Küver-Christen

Only Atlassian can answer that. As the Atlassian/Jira administrator and end-to-end ownerand also a Bachelor Professional in Business Administration Controlling so i quite understand Business Aspect.

My view is that the reason is quite clear: they developed their own backup & restore solution and are now offering it as a paid product.

Dirk Küver-Christen · Answer

That's precisely the point I want to understand: why was this decision made? What's wrong with using our own S3 storage, especially if it's located in the same region?

As an enterprise customer, we've been using this feature since the beta phase and are more than satisfied. Why would they simply scrap something like this?