The largest DDoS attack to date, peaking above 398M rps

Post by RektBoy » Tue, Oct 10, 2023, 7:56 PM UTC

pythonguython wrote: post #219

Who has an incentive to carry out these DDos attacks? Why would anyone be willing to spend large amounts of money and develop a sophisticated attack against corporate cloud infrastructure? It seems like the only reasonable answer is foreign governments. But still what is the result - you inconvenience American tech companies and their customers for a few hours? This happens all the time, so clearly someone finds it w…

Post by permo-w » Tue, Oct 10, 2023, 8:31 PM UTC

pythonguython wrote: post #219

Who has an incentive to carry out these DDos attacks? Why would anyone be willing to spend large amounts of money and develop a sophisticated attack against corporate cloud infrastructure? It seems like the only reasonable answer is foreign governments. But still what is the result - you inconvenience American tech companies and their customers for a few hours? This happens all the time, so clearly someone finds it w…

Post by somedude895 » Tue, Oct 10, 2023, 8:38 PM UTC

red-iron-pine wrote: post #321

karaterobot wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can (or could, my information is old) pay botnet owners a few hundred bucks to disrupt the servers of people you don't like. An example would be ruining a match for a competing game clan. There's a suprising amount of this kind of petty bullshit going on in the world. With the Mirai botnet, some of the creators had a DDOS mitigation company as well: they'd sell one party the weapon, and sell another party the def…

Disruption is part of it for sure, but often big, aggressive DDoS come hand-in-hand with other attacks. Seen it happen with big DDoS on clients. Furaffinity, one of the larger furry webistes, and a constant drama magnet, was a client at a former job. They got DDoS'd hard, and in between scripted DDoS hits they slammed the hell out of their web applications to get vulns and do credential stuffing. As in blast em, ligh…

Post by paganel » Tue, Oct 10, 2023, 9:00 PM UTC

myth_drannon wrote: post #406

paganel wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what the OP is saying is related to one of the paradoxes of security/defence, i.e. the fact that the more one increases its defences (like Google is doing) then the more said increase of defences also pushes one's adversary to increase its offence capabilities. Which is to say that Google playing it safer and safer actually causes their potential adversaries to become stronger and stronger. You can see those par…

It's the opposite, the number of rocket was growing and hence the Iron Dome was developed. The Israelis saw the writing on the wall and acted accordingly. The laser system will be operational soon and then it will cost 1$ per shot.

Post by aa_is_op » Tue, Oct 10, 2023, 9:21 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #276

jedberg wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been working on anti-DDOS off and on for 20 years now. The answer is sometimes government actors, but oftentimes scammers in Eastern Europe. They do these big attacks for street cred amongst the botting community. They then use their street cred to get paid by less scrupulous actors to attack their rivals. Sometimes the people paying are governments, sometimes just shady companies. For example last year there wa…

Seems like attacking Google would be a bad target for street cred as compared to govt websites.