site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Endicott, NY
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
·Verizon Online DSL

reply to Matt

Re: Illegal?

said by Matt:

Trying to establish 8000 new sessions a SECOND is a DDoS
Minor nitpick but I don't know as if I'd call that a 'DDoS'. DDoS == distributed denial of service attack and is typically something that is launched with thousands of different hosts on hundreds of different networks, usually using owned systems (via a botnet).

What Media Defender did definitely qualifies as a DoS but I'd question whether or not the usage of the term 'DDoS' is accurate here.

Necronomikro

join:2005-09-01

said by Crookshanks:

said by Matt:

Trying to establish 8000 new sessions a SECOND is a DDoS
Minor nitpick but I don't know as if I'd call that a 'DDoS'. DDoS == distributed denial of service attack and is typically something that is launched with thousands of different hosts on hundreds of different networks, usually using owned systems (via a botnet).

What Media Defender did definitely qualifies as a DoS but I'd question whether or not the usage of the term 'DDoS' is accurate here.
"The company, with 2,000 servers and 9Gbps of dedicated bandwidth at their disposal"

Sounds like a DDOS to me. May not have been distributed amongst many different networks, but it was many different computers within a high-speed network.


dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus

join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI

I think its resonable to assume it was distributed. Otherwise 2000 computers are not getting out of the same network pipe without DOSsing themselves.


cornelius785

join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA

reply to Necronomikro
i consider a DoS attack to be a DDoS attack when the packets come from computers that are distributed over a large area, not (from the sounds of it) a server farm. i don't know all the little details but based on "The company, with 2,000 servers and 9Gbps of dedicated bandwidth at their disposal" and that all the packets originated from a small set of IP addresses (maybe one???), but i wouldn't consider that a DDoS attack. i'm guessing the reason for all the servers (assuming they were in a server farm) was to be able to ensure the entire bandwidth of the connection (9 Gbps) could be saturated.



funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

reply to Necronomikro

said by Necronomikro:

"The company, with 2,000 servers and 9Gbps of dedicated bandwidth at their disposal"

Sounds like a DDOS to me. May not have been distributed amongst many different networks, but it was many different computers within a high-speed network.
According to the logs that I saw, two IPTABLES entries would have solved it. It sounds like they made a last-minute change on a Friday and left town for the weekend. MediaDefender's buggy scripts went nuts.

This was "amateur hour" on both MediaDefenders and Revision3's accounts. That said, MediaDefender was the inflicter of damage and was the primary cause of this accident.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...


Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

said by funchords:

said by Necronomikro:

"The company, with 2,000 servers and 9Gbps of dedicated bandwidth at their disposal"

Sounds like a DDOS to me. May not have been distributed amongst many different networks, but it was many different computers within a high-speed network.
According to the logs that I saw, two IPTABLES entries would have solved it. It sounds like they made a last-minute change on a Friday and left town for the weekend. MediaDefender's buggy scripts went nuts.

This was "amateur hour" on both MediaDefenders and Revision3's accounts. That said, MediaDefender was the inflicter of damage and was the primary cause of this accident.
Doesn't matter what you do with iptables if you're sitting on a 100Mbps, or even 1Gbps port, and you have 9Gbps of traffic coming at you.

openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2

I doubt that MD was utilizing all 9 Gbps to flood Revision3. I haven't seen the logs that funchords See Profile is referring to, but iptables or PF, or pick your packet filter can be quite effective against rudimentary DoS attacks.



funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

reply to Matt
very true


Fieryphoenix

join:2004-05-10

reply to dnoyeB
Actually, MD has a staggeringly huge pipe. All the servers were likely at their location, not distributed.



GamerGeek
Premium
join:2003-07-26
Fortuna, CA

reply to Crookshanks

said by Crookshanks:

said by Matt:

Trying to establish 8000 new sessions a SECOND is a DDoS
Minor nitpick but I don't know as if I'd call that a 'DDoS'. DDoS == distributed denial of service attack and is typically something that is launched with thousands of different hosts on hundreds of different networks, usually using owned systems (via a botnet).

What Media Defender did definitely qualifies as a DoS but I'd question whether or not the usage of the term 'DDoS' is accurate here.
I'd be inclined to agree. Swap distributed for directed and it becomes exactly what MD planned.


james

join:2001-02-26
CWCville USA

reply to cornelius785

said by cornelius785:

i consider a DoS attack to be a DDoS attack when the packets come from computers that are distributed over a large area, not (from the sounds of it) a server farm.
You can't just make up definitions for commonly used terms and then expect everyone to go along with you.
The distributed refers to not being a single computer attack, physical location is irrelevant.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

said by james:

said by cornelius785:

i consider a DoS attack to be a DDoS attack when the packets come from computers that are distributed over a large area, not (from the sounds of it) a server farm.
You can't just make up definitions for commonly used terms and then expect everyone to go along with you.
The distributed refers to not being a single computer attack, physical location is irrelevant.
Whatever. I don't disagree with you, but whatever. We're arguing over semantics while agreeing on what happened.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...


burner50
Helping Darwin WIN
Premium,VIP
join:2002-06-05
Cowtown
kudos:1
Reviews:
·inmotionhosting

reply to Crookshanks
When the DoS attack is distributed over 2000 computers even if they are all in the same building IMO that is Distributed...

They DISTRIBUTED the DoS load over their entire server farm...

This company needs to go down.
--
I'm tired of killing stupid people just trying to do my job and go home!


Wednesday, 30-May 06:24:26 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics