141–150 of 318 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. Manufacturers / distributors should be held responsible. Aligning the incentives is half the battle.
Yes, need to protect Azure from those evil manufacturers.
It would be better to get the regulation set up before stronger gatekeepers are created
This is what I don't get >The Aisuru DDoS botnet operates as a DDoS-for-hire service with restricted clientele; operators have reportedly implemented preventive measures to avoid attacking governmental, law enforcement, military, and other national security properties. Most observed Aisuru attacks to date appear to be related to online gaming. https://www.netscout.com/blog/asert/asert-threat-summary-ais... So why? Li…
Not saying that's the case in this particular incident though.
This is what I don't get >The Aisuru DDoS botnet operates as a DDoS-for-hire service with restricted clientele; operators have reportedly implemented preventive measures to avoid attacking governmental, law enforcement, military, and other national security properties. Most observed Aisuru attacks to date appear to be related to online gaming. https://www.netscout.com/blog/asert/asert-threat-summary-ais... So why? Li…
What's the point of this? Are they continuously running DDoS somewhere and 40 second is what the buyer paid for?
I feel like posting the traffic output of the network might not be a great idea because they might do these attacks on purpose to market their network's capability.
This is what I don't get >The Aisuru DDoS botnet operates as a DDoS-for-hire service with restricted clientele; operators have reportedly implemented preventive measures to avoid attacking governmental, law enforcement, military, and other national security properties. Most observed Aisuru attacks to date appear to be related to online gaming. https://www.netscout.com/blog/asert/asert-threat-summary-ais... So why? Li…
> This attack lasted only 40 seconds What's the point of this? Are they continuously running DDoS somewhere and 40 second is what the buyer paid for?
IoT botnet. Just read that again, we're literally inventing problems where none needs to exist.
IoT adds basically null or negative value, except to nerds who like to think they're smarter than other people by consuming the latest e-slop.
Its all so tiresome.
> it suddenly ballooned in size in April 2025 after its operators breached a TotoLink router firmware update server and infected approximately 100,000 devices This is scary. Everyone lauds open source projects like OpenWRT but... who is watching their servers? I imagine you can't run an army of security people on donations and a shoestring budget. Does OpenWRT use digital signing to mitigate this?
I don't follow. > run an army of security people Do you think these private companies do this? They don't. They pay as little as humanly possible to cover their ass. Botnets comprised of compromised routers is common and commercial/consumer routers are a far juicer target than openwrt.
They probably spend more on the team who ends up writing the "We take your security very seriously" breach notification message than they do on "security people". At least until then get forced into brand-name external Cyber Security Consultants to "investigate" their breach and work out who they can plausibly blame it on that's not part of the C suite.
This is what I don't get >The Aisuru DDoS botnet operates as a DDoS-for-hire service with restricted clientele; operators have reportedly implemented preventive measures to avoid attacking governmental, law enforcement, military, and other national security properties. Most observed Aisuru attacks to date appear to be related to online gaming. https://www.netscout.com/blog/asert/asert-threat-summary-ais... So why? Li…
What is even more interesting why attack Azure? It's not possible to extort anything from Microsoft, so what's the rationale?
If it's going to cost me about the same in terms of resources to target you and a bunch of other people colocated with you, it's a bit less obvious who launched it and why.