DDOS Attacks

[filc]

@Caley McKibbin

DoS attacks work so well because ISPs use a stupid charge system. Instead of charging senders per MB they charge flat rates for fixed bandwidth. Fix that and you fix several problems with the internet.

Heh isn’t this exactly what they’re trying to do? But the nay-sayers are crying wolf?

[filc]

@liberty student

filc, my man love for you increases now that I know you’re a cloud master.

It’s both an exciting, and furiously frustrating thing to be into. A year ago I had some theory’s as to how this whole cloud thing, coupled with virtualization, was going to pan out. Now I question my own speculation. Thats what makes it fun though I guess.

Over a year ago we were a primarily eucalyptus joint, now we have migrated most our stuff to vmware. Though we still have resources in both. The market moves fast, and so will we!

@Student

I only meant that there wasn’t some new tool or technology that saved amazon. 5 years ago excess bandwidth would have deflected the ddos attack just as easily as it did last month.

But as stated before, especially in the case of amazon, it was not likely a bandwidth intense DDOS attack. Those are far more difficult to concert, and less efficient, though more damaging as they bring down networks laterally.

The most efficient way to DDOS is just to send a specific web app various requests. Seeing if the node has the computational ability to keep up with the requests. In the case with amazon, their novelty was being the first to scale server performance on-demand.

Any report that comes out pretending to know exactly what kind of DDOS attack was performed on Amazon is sheer speculation. Unless it was published by a hactivist itself, Amazon is not going to release such a report, regarding the vulnerabilities of their internal network, and it’s not likely to be the hactivists either. I’ve read those reports before and I usually just gloss over them. Most of those guys writing that stuff have on idea.

On a side note, this is why companies like Mojang for example, the creators of minecraft, move their hosting to Amazon. Specifically because their existing provider could not handle DDOS attacks. Amazon just gobbles it up.

@LS

Problems are solved in the market, not in economic papers.

This

[Caley_McKibbin]

Mostly, they are for “pre-teens” whose parents don’t trust them with a real cell phone.

Pay by minute/megabtyte is for people who use 1000th the service of The ISP Employee uploading terabytes of warez from the secret server at the office and don’t want to pay a socialized rate set according to the cost of running that. The people that should be paying are the idiots that downloaded freeporn.exe, whose computers are sending attack packets, and uploading with Limewire 24/7. The present internet works about the same as the health care system. It is indeed a rip-off paying for what you get.

The main reason that few people buy pay per use telecom services, aside from general stupidity… well, you find me such a service and I’ll buy it. Excellence brought to you by the telecom monopoly.

Heh isn’t this exactly what they’re trying to do? But the nay-sayers are crying wolf?

I don’t know the exact technical details of how they propose to operate. The main point for me is that charges must be for upstream, not downstream, according to the load placed on the routers.