Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 263 posts

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#141

Post by rayuela »

mancerayder wrote: post #105

Is it confirmed yet that so-called IoT devices were the bots? Bruce was on point if so, arguing a couple weeks ago that accountability needs to happen on the manufacturers: "What was new about the Krebs attack was both the massive scale and the particular devices the attackers recruited. Instead of using traditional computers for their botnet, they used CCTV cameras, digital video recorders, home routers, and other e…

I feel like I hadn't thought of this as a market failure until reading your post calling it that. You're absolutely right about it. That's exactly what it is and the need for government involvement is quite obvious now. Suppliers are going to need to be held liable for the negative externalities their product offerings create, otherwise we're stuck at an equilibrium point where this situation does not improve.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#142

Post by qaq »

atmosx wrote: post #121
stcredzero wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Azure and Google would like to gain a competitive advantage over AWS, then I would suggest this: Build out a suite of tools for fighting DDOS. Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. Do this in such a way, that cloud customers save money and have to worry about less. Hell, let companies jump in structured as insurance companies! Also bring in cooperation with law enforcement and use…

> Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability (the files are saved in multiple AZs in the same region - Glacier IIRC copy files on different regions to avoid data loss in case of physical disaster). One of the reason for choosing AWS is because AMZ has deep pockets and has…

"achieve 11 9's availability" is this sarcasm?

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#143

Post by abysmallyideal »

cm2187 wrote: post #33
msane wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully it's not related threats about hacking during the election. Remember that recently Biden openly threatened cyber attack on Russia if they make any attempt to tamper with the election. Which is completely unprecedented, as is the notion that DOD is openly saying Russia was behind DNC and other attacks.

Also what amazed me is that he would casually threaten to strike Russia. It seems that no one considers these attacks as an act of war. But that's what they are.

The idiot is embarrassed because the DNC was exposed as fraudulent and corrupt to the core. One might figure only the Russians would be interested in exposing the underlying machinations of American politics, but it really is just a classic case of misdirection.

He's also threatening not just the Russians, but the American citizens as well... that if they try to challenge the system as it is, then the politicians would rather start a major war than to address any concerns of fraud/corruption.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#144

Post by ryanlol »

atmosx wrote: post #121
stcredzero wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Azure and Google would like to gain a competitive advantage over AWS, then I would suggest this: Build out a suite of tools for fighting DDOS. Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. Do this in such a way, that cloud customers save money and have to worry about less. Hell, let companies jump in structured as insurance companies! Also bring in cooperation with law enforcement and use…

> Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability (the files are saved in multiple AZs in the same region - Glacier IIRC copy files on different regions to avoid data loss in case of physical disaster). One of the reason for choosing AWS is because AMZ has deep pockets and has…

> If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability

If you are an AWS customer you should have done your due diligence and know that amazon won't do a very good job at that.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#145

Post by abysmallyideal »

catawbasam wrote: post #51
meowface wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's espionage, not necessarily an act of war. The US government is threatening to strike back with more espionage. (If they haven't already...)

If a foreign entity is attacking our infastructure, that could certainly be viewed as an act of war.

What if an entity willingly allowed the attacks or espionage to continue? Like the NSA allowing foreign nations to spy on US citizens and corporations, or the CIA operating and allowing drug operations to run amok within US borders, or the OPM breach?

You can't just have one without being able to hold all of those responsible accountable.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#146

Post by exolymph »

rayuela wrote: post #141
mancerayder wrote: post #105

Is it confirmed yet that so-called IoT devices were the bots? Bruce was on point if so, arguing a couple weeks ago that accountability needs to happen on the manufacturers: "What was new about the Krebs attack was both the massive scale and the particular devices the attackers recruited. Instead of using traditional computers for their botnet, they used CCTV cameras, digital video recorders, home routers, and other e…

I feel like I hadn't thought of this as a market failure until reading your post calling it that. You're absolutely right about it. That's exactly what it is and the need for government involvement is quite obvious now. Suppliers are going to need to be held liable for the negative externalities their product offerings create, otherwise we're stuck at an equilibrium point where this situation does not improve.

Yup, it's a classic externality.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#147

Post by toomuchtodo »

ryanlol wrote: post #144
atmosx wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability (the files are saved in multiple AZs in the same region - Glacier IIRC copy files on different regions to avoid data loss in case of physical disaster). One of the reason for choosing AWS is because AMZ has deep pockets and has…

> If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability If you are an AWS customer you should have done your due diligence and know that amazon won't do a very good job at that.

I don't understand how people who use AWS have such unrealistic expectations.

Someone will always have the upper hand in an arms race, and it's not service providers yet. It's just a matter of finding the choke point between their transit and your code.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#148

Post by Splines »

rayuela wrote: post #141
mancerayder wrote: post #105

Is it confirmed yet that so-called IoT devices were the bots? Bruce was on point if so, arguing a couple weeks ago that accountability needs to happen on the manufacturers: "What was new about the Krebs attack was both the massive scale and the particular devices the attackers recruited. Instead of using traditional computers for their botnet, they used CCTV cameras, digital video recorders, home routers, and other e…

I feel like I hadn't thought of this as a market failure until reading your post calling it that. You're absolutely right about it. That's exactly what it is and the need for government involvement is quite obvious now. Suppliers are going to need to be held liable for the negative externalities their product offerings create, otherwise we're stuck at an equilibrium point where this situation does not improve.

If ISPs were treated like a utility and charged per bit, customers would have an incentive to ensure that their devices weren't dumping traffic onto the internet. It's rare that you can see a dashboard showing your usage, even rarer to see a dashboard showing your usage, broken down by device.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#149

Post by Splines »

mjevans wrote: post #85
drvdevd wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you call that detectable? Eespecially en masse. Perhaps a smart grid could detect these attacks in some way and dynamically adjust power to compromised devices?

I wouldn't. The signal ratio to noise very likely just isn't there. Remember, people regularly operate toaster ovens, microwaves, hairdryers, etc on a fluxuating basis, and THOSE tend to consume more like 1200+ Watts for a /single/ device.

Here's a real-world case of the above happening (tea kettles): http://www.bbc.co.uk/britainfromabove/stories/people/teatime...

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#150

Post by _adamb »

qaq wrote: post #142
atmosx wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Enable private consultants and companies to provide this as a service. If I am an AWS customer I expect AWS to handle/prevent DDoS, same way as they do with S3 to achieve 11 9's availability (the files are saved in multiple AZs in the same region - Glacier IIRC copy files on different regions to avoid data loss in case of physical disaster). One of the reason for choosing AWS is because AMZ has deep pockets and has…

"achieve 11 9's availability" is this sarcasm?

They're referring to AWS S3's claim of 99.999999999% durability. AWS actually offers 99.99% availability.
Post reply on HN