Live data from Hacker News

Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

pastie.org

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@everyone who doesn't work in hosting.... >"why did Rails Machine throw out the site so quickly?" If you run a datacenter, you pay for an uplink. That uplink has limited capacity. 4gbit, 10gbit...whatever. A big attack can saturate that link completely, so even with the biggest most expensive "mitigation device" on the market (some of this gear can get into the hundreds-of-thousands-of-dollars for /one/ device, mind…

People who haven't worked in hosting don't realize that not only is the gear $100,000+, the administrators that understand it are just as expensive. Annually. (Mitigation is a relatively rare skill for network administrators.) Edit: Let's say you run Joe's Web Hosting. Joe's has three facilities, and you run redundant ten gigabit uplinks at each. Last I priced a device that could handle ten gigabit at line rate, it w…

your example is pointless as no actual datacenter actually pays their equipment vendor anywhere near list price for those devices. i certainly don't.

network equipment vendors like to have high list prices in order to:

- ensure they get sales inquiries from serious buyers;

- give sales representatives a large amount of leverage when negotiating the actual line-item pricing for each purchase order;

- promote some kind of enhanced "value" to executives ("it costs a lot of money, so it must be good!")

a realistic price for two routers with two 10gig-e linecards is about $15,000-$25,000 per unit direct from brocade. cisco would be around the $35,000-$50,000 per unit ballpark. if you're paying any more than that, you're getting extremely shafted.

further, the circuits for the uplinks aren't going to cost that much themselves, as it's all sold under percentile-billing (not even 95%, usually more like 90% or 80% at over-gig-e levels these days) when we're talking actual transit costs. commits for "Joe's Web Hosting" might only be 1.5gig on each 10gig circuit, so that cuts down pricing a lot right there.

in terms of getting an experienced engineer, most attacks can be detected and mitigated automatically using netflow/sflow/ipfix flow analysis. i wrote software which handles the detection automatically, with a fairly high success rate, and it's free to use on bitbucket. :)

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#52
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who haven't worked in hosting don't realize that not only is the gear $100,000+, the administrators that understand it are just as expensive. Annually. (Mitigation is a relatively rare skill for network administrators.) Edit: Let's say you run Joe's Web Hosting. Joe's has three facilities, and you run redundant ten gigabit uplinks at each. Last I priced a device that could handle ten gigabit at line rate, it w…

your example is pointless as no actual datacenter actually pays their equipment vendor anywhere near list price for those devices. i certainly don't. network equipment vendors like to have high list prices in order to: - ensure they get sales inquiries from serious buyers; - give sales representatives a large amount of leverage when negotiating the actual line-item pricing for each purchase order; - promote some kind…

This was a price I received directly from a vendor who isn't Cisco or Brocade at a trade show. I honestly don't remember who because I lost interest, but I believe it was Black Lotus. It was priced per gigabit, and we needed ten. ~$12,000/gigabit, $120,000 device. Someone from Black Lotus can feel free to correct me. I was uninterested in negotiations from the get-go based on that ballpark, so if what you say is true, these vendors are doing themselves a disservice by talking me out of investigating them further simply based on a ballpark price. I also wasn't pricing routers, I was pricing mitigation gear. Cisco discontinued theirs, didn't they? The Guard? I seem to recall an admin who deployed Guards telling me they were (are?) six figures as well.

I worked for a serious buyer when I had this casual conversation with the vendor. You do business with my former employer (I've spoken to you before, when you took over cia.vc). I'd consider those facilities "real" datacenters, and they're certainly the same size, if not significantly larger, than your hosting outfit. No need to appeal to authority with me, honestly, I think we're on the same page -- I think your comment misread me as pricing routers instead of mitigation gear.

As for flows, I was interested in a solution that I didn't have to write software to implement. I'd rather have a supported appliance that can handle figuring out DoS attacks itself, rather than me parsing flows and feeding that information back. That way, if the software doesn't work, I can blame somebody else rather than me. My time is precious. Yours sounds less so, and that's your prerogative.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#53
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your example is pointless as no actual datacenter actually pays their equipment vendor anywhere near list price for those devices. i certainly don't. network equipment vendors like to have high list prices in order to: - ensure they get sales inquiries from serious buyers; - give sales representatives a large amount of leverage when negotiating the actual line-item pricing for each purchase order; - promote some kind…

This was a price I received directly from a vendor who isn't Cisco or Brocade at a trade show. I honestly don't remember who because I lost interest, but I believe it was Black Lotus. It was priced per gigabit, and we needed ten. ~$12,000/gigabit, $120,000 device. Someone from Black Lotus can feel free to correct me. I was uninterested in negotiations from the get-go based on that ballpark, so if what you say is true…

yes, Cisco discontinued the Guard module, which is unfortunate, as it did a pretty good job at determining what ACLs needed to be generated and applying them, and was actually much cheaper than the appliances.

in terms of mitigation hardware, all of those appliances are a ripoff. the solution is to replace them with free software that does automatic analysis on the flows and then sends that data automatically elsewhere, putting them out of business.

i have a system set up that does automatic mitigation using ddosmon by having a "scrubbing center" running on freebsd-based devices. this is accomplished by having a custom 'action' module in ddosmon which does three things:

- calculate the necessary ACLs

- insert them into the appropriate pf tables so the mitigation strategy fits my ruleset

- direct the router to send traffic for the IP being flooded to the scrubbing appliance

this is basically the way that the mitigation appliance vendors tell you to do it if you're handling >10gig floods anyway.

i think ddos mitigation is really a place where free software can cause a massively needed paradigm shift.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#54
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a price I received directly from a vendor who isn't Cisco or Brocade at a trade show. I honestly don't remember who because I lost interest, but I believe it was Black Lotus. It was priced per gigabit, and we needed ten. ~$12,000/gigabit, $120,000 device. Someone from Black Lotus can feel free to correct me. I was uninterested in negotiations from the get-go based on that ballpark, so if what you say is true…

yes, Cisco discontinued the Guard module, which is unfortunate, as it did a pretty good job at determining what ACLs needed to be generated and applying them, and was actually much cheaper than the appliances. in terms of mitigation hardware, all of those appliances are a ripoff. the solution is to replace them with free software that does automatic analysis on the flows and then sends that data automatically elsewhe…

I will check it out, and it genuinely sounds interesting. Thanks.

> i think ddos mitigation is really a place where free software can cause a massively needed paradigm shift.

I'd argue resilient, reliable network gear in general is such a place. Reassuring to hear that Google is adopting Openflow and rolling their own ... maybe that'll trickle down. Cisco gear has led the way of being overpriced for fucking years.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#55
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would have appreciated if you did explain what an effective mitigation strategy is.

Depending on your position, there really isn't one. The hosting company can implement one, which they might be able to insert in your path if you are at the receiving end of an attack. There are Cisco products and a bunch of up-and-comers that can do this. If you're a "typical startup" with an Amazon footprint, you have no mitigation strategy for flooding attacks aside from not attracting them. If someone points mult…

That's a little pessimistic.

There's a range[2] of ISPs who will sell DDoS protection to you, either as an addon when you host with them, or as an external service (re-routing your traffic).

E.g. StormOnDemand just recently added it to their portfolio[1], which is note-worthy because they actually list prices right on the website.

Either way, even without "explicit protection" any ISP beyond mom&pop-size deals with these attacks every day and will sort them out for you for free the first couple times. Only when they turn into a habit or become so huge that they have to talk to their upstream they will politely ask you to throw some money their way.

Pulling the plug immediately is definitely not normal. However considering Pastie was apparently a sponsored account it's at least somewhat understandable (albeit a terrible PR move).

[1] https://www.stormondemand.com/ddos.html

[2] When in doubt, and pockets deep enough, there's always Akamai. They're the ones who can filter TBit/s-scale (yes, that was a T) attacks for you.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#56
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> paying customers that do not attract DoS attacks A little off topic, but I've always felt a slightly uneasy about the concept of "attracting" DDoS attacks. Sure, if you knowingly piss off a bunch of script kiddies, you're attracting attacks. But it seems that nowadays, any site that hosts user-generated content is at risk of being attacked for any random reason. And yet, a lot of people talk about "customers who at…

> It almost sounds like blaming women who wear certain types of clothes for attracting sex crime. I completely stopped reading this comment here, when you wrote this, because that was a completely off-base comparison and has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Worse, you probably know it; I wouldn't assume you to be stupid. And that was a mountainously stupid comment. In hosting, there are customers that…

Sorry if my comment came across as suggesting that your argument had an "undertone of sexism". I definitely wasn't trying to say anything of the sort. It was just an analogy that popped into my mind, and I don't think it was a particularly bad analogy.

But I don't think your unwarranted indignation adds anything to the question that I was trying to ask to other HNers. Unfortunately, that question was at the end of my comment, past the point where you stopped reading.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#57
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on your position, there really isn't one. The hosting company can implement one, which they might be able to insert in your path if you are at the receiving end of an attack. There are Cisco products and a bunch of up-and-comers that can do this. If you're a "typical startup" with an Amazon footprint, you have no mitigation strategy for flooding attacks aside from not attracting them. If someone points mult…

That's a little pessimistic. There's a range[2] of ISPs who will sell DDoS protection to you, either as an addon when you host with them, or as an external service (re-routing your traffic). E.g. StormOnDemand just recently added it to their portfolio[1], which is note-worthy because they actually list prices right on the website. Either way, even without "explicit protection" any ISP beyond mom&pop-size deals with t…

> Pulling the plug immediately is definitely not normal.

Nulling immediately is. You're also assuming that this is Pastie's first DoS attack, which we don't know based on the information presented to us.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#58

DDOS attacks are a fact of life, nice to know that Rails Machine will throw you under the bus when one happens. Doesn't seem to fit their homepage description: "You write Rails apps. We deploy, manage, support, monitor, and scale them. Done."

So if someone throws multiple tens of gigabits at your customer, and your upstream threatens to turn off your entire hosting company, you would respond "no way, we're going the extra mile for our customer"? Rails Machine was, in all likelihood, compelled to act to either (a) preserve its relationship with is upstream or (b) preserve its relationship with its other paying customers that do not attract DoS attacks. You…

[deleted]

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#59
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a little pessimistic. There's a range[2] of ISPs who will sell DDoS protection to you, either as an addon when you host with them, or as an external service (re-routing your traffic). E.g. StormOnDemand just recently added it to their portfolio[1], which is note-worthy because they actually list prices right on the website. Either way, even without "explicit protection" any ISP beyond mom&pop-size deals with t…

> Pulling the plug immediately is definitely not normal. Nulling immediately is. You're also assuming that this is Pastie's first DoS attack, which we don't know based on the information presented to us.

Nulling immediately is.

For serious accounts (in the 6 digits/year) absolutely not, unless the attack is large enough to affect other customers.

Admittedly RailsMachine looks very small, in all likelihood their pipe was rather easily clogged and they simply didn't have the choices that larger ISPs have.

Re: Pastie.org host pulls hosting after DDoS attack

#60
I'd like to apologize to those who have been negatively impacted by my decision to pull support for Pastie (especially Josh). To understand why I made the decision to pull our support after 9 hours of multiple DDOS attacks, I'd like to share some background and our ops philosophy.

It is important to understand that I put our existing customers that pay us to manage and scale their high growth revenue-generating web applications before all else. This is the core of our business and what they trust us to do. As we are seeing now, this means that I will protect them at the expense of making some non-customers and "risky" customers upset. Let me explain further...

Rails Machine at this time is 6 people. Through a lot of tools like Moonshine, experience, and process we manage 100+ web applications. Please note that I did not say "host". Hosting is only part of the package. We commit to do whatever it takes to keep our customers' applications available and growing their business.

Everyone in the organization is a developer on a varying scale of dev to ops including myself who started with Rails in 2005 and have been a professional dev for 20 years.

Although not as quiet as we would like, in general the workload of responding to outages, bugs, scaling problems, and traffic bursts are managed by the team. We've been doing this for 6 years focused specifically on Rails and have seen most problems with Rails applications in production. This makes us fairly efficient in identifying and resolving issues.

We've been hosting Pastie pretty much since the beginning and free of charge for several years. In the past two years, Pastie began to attract a lot of users intending to use it to do illegal things. This includes sharing stolen credit cards, stolen passwords, phishing schemes, copyrighted content, virus/trojan horses, hacker scripts, confidential corporate info, etc, etc.

Please know that the overwhelming majority of Pastie's user base are well meaning folks who kindly follow Josh's basic rule of "using Pastie for good". A tiny minority however attract a lot of attention through their public pastes that ruin the experience for everyone else.

Aside from the obvious problems, the public existence of this stuff makes a lot of people upset who in turn threaten us. This includes but not limited to criminals, giant corporations, angry individuals, trolls, and more importantly our data center/upstream provider. These upset people then send us nastygrams requiring us to take action or else. "Or else" includes suing us, arresting us, DDoSing us, and more importantly terminating our service.

To avoid bad things happening to us and all of our other customers, we have to take action immediately. Every now then other customers get a spam notice or a DMCA notice but in general it happens once and not a huge deal. Pastie on the other hand generates 100s of abuse complaints. Abuse complaints that we can not ignore and require us to investigate and follow up on. While we are doing this, we are not helping the 100+ other customers that generate zero abuse complaints and most likely never will.

Enter the DDos. Over the past 6 years, we've handled multiple DDoS attacks on different applications. Given that 95% of our customers are running revenue-generating business applications, we deal with a DDoS about once or maybe twice per year. They are really annoying and consume a lot of time and a lot of concurrent team members. Although we wish they never happened, as some have pointed out DDoS attacks are a fact of life. Many high profile sites with much larger teams and budgets have struggled for multiple days fighting waves of attacks. We accept this as part of our job.

The problem in this particular instance is that these DDoS attacks on Pastie were a continuation of the stream of operational disruptions already being generated by the site. After handling the first attack with four of us covering all of the angles around 10pm and with the help of Internap's network team, we halted the attack.

Within a few hours, it began again in the wee hours of the morning. At the same time, alerts for another customer who had entrusted us with their business came in. So a decision was made to halt the second attack as quickly as possible and focus on doing our job as we promised to the rest of our customers. We could have chosen to ride out multiple other attacks and engage in a lot of time consuming and expensive behavior to preserve a site that was already a source of ops disruption. Making that choice would have been inconsistent with our values and commitments.

This decision was purely ops motivated to protect our team members ability to serve our core customers.

Some of you are upset about this decision and I am sorry for that. I know 100+ customers that would approve. I put my customers and team first.

Please feel free to reach out to me directly (email or twitter) if you would like to discuss this further.

@bradleyktaylor, Founder, Rails Machine

Post reply on HN