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

161–170 of 263 posts

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#161

Post by abluecloud »

gamegod wrote: post #45

Irony alert: > "But technology providers in the United States could suffer blowback. As Dyn fell under recurring attacks on Friday, Mr. York, the chief strategist, said such assaults were the reason so many companies are pushing at least parts of their infrastructure to cloud computing networks, to decentralize their systems and make them harder to attack." Pushing your infrastructure to cloud computing is not decent…

AWS was hit today, we saw a spike failures. Got hold of one of AWS guys and they basically noticed that the issue they saw in the US earlier in the day happened again in EU west. Funnily enough they probably could have avoided it if they'd deployed their mitigation to the other zones.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#162

Post by niftich »

woodandsteel wrote: post #158
misrab wrote: post #93

could we just move along with ipfs and a distributed web please guys, it's about time!

I agree. From what I understand, ipfs is designed to solve this problem (and several others). Maybe this will motivate the big actors to look into it seriously. Anybody disagree?

I love IPFS but how exactly does IPFS/IPNS solve the DDOS problem? The FAQ entry on this is not very convincing [1].

[1] https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/171

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#163

Post by snarfy »

mjevans wrote: post #90
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #15

We seem to be needing more concerted action on what is a consumer minimum standard for an internet connected device. Consumer devices have to be more secure because if the low user skill level - and interest. I am always reluctant to say "there should be a law against it" but frankly if we cannot mandate minimum standards of uogradbility and security for devices we will just keep handing over our devices to the first…

Or you need to make it easier for the 'black hole' solution to be pushed further and further back to the sources of the bad traffic. A remote site shouldn't be able to get you banned from the Internet (by it's self); but it MUST be able to say, "This host is being abusive, restrain them from sending me data". ISPs SHOULD use that information to evaluate if a host from their network might be compromised or otherwise a…

> this might take the form of instead banning that ISP from the Internet as a whole.

I agree with some of your points, but fracturing the internet is not a viable option. It might make sense if it were a healthy, competitive market instead of the near monopolies that exist today. Imagine banning Comcast, or AT&T.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#164

Post by [deleted] »

danieltillett wrote: post #140
tptacek wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "backdoor access" are you talking about? These botnets spread via static admin passwords.

I think what the OP is implying is that these static admin passwords were put as a deniable backdoor. If it was a Chinese gov scheme it is quite clever as a real backdoor would have been obvious, while this just looks like total incompetence.

[deleted]

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#165

Post by adamiscool8 »

tptacek wrote: post #155
danieltillett wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what the OP is implying is that these static admin passwords were put as a deniable backdoor. If it was a Chinese gov scheme it is quite clever as a real backdoor would have been obvious, while this just looks like total incompetence.

This makes no sense. Everyone knows what the default passwords are. And all sorts of products not made in China have default passwords. And, some of the products implicated in these attacks aren't Chinese. I think the OP is grasping at straws.

I was thinking of the hardcoded passwords in Xiongmai Tech components that were linked to the Krebs DDOS. Very much in line with the rumors about Huawei and ZTE a few years back, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Hard to define a motive though.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#166

Post by kswahl1 »

abysmallyideal wrote: post #143
cm2187 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wou…

DNC and RNC are corrupt to the core. Does that really need to be exposed? It's been a know fact for a few decades.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#167

Post by dsr12 »

Wikileaks tweeted:

"Mr. Assange is still alive and WikiLeaks is still publishing. We ask supporters to stop taking down the US internet. You proved your point. "

Link: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789574436219449345

If their claim is true, does anyone think, it will turn many sympathizers against them? I don't think attacking normal bushiness is a good thing to do.

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#168

Post by lucb1e »

msie wrote: post #108
adamiscool8 wrote: post #49

It's fashionable to blame Russia these days, but what country manufactures the most IoT devices, and has the type of government that could mandate backdoor access?

It's been fashionable to blame China not so long ago.

Did I miss it going out of fashion?

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#169

Post by [deleted] »

ryanlol wrote: post #160
toomuchtodo wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>I don't understand how people who use AWS have such unrealistic expectations. Well, the whole point of AWS is not having to deal with the usual hosting stuff. They'll naturally have lots of customers with high expectations and very little understanding of how things work in the background.

[deleted]

Re: Internet Attack Spreads, Disrupting Major Websites

#170

Post by mysterypie »

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.

> It seems that no one considers these attacks as an act of war. But that's what they are.

Wouldn't it be better that we on Hacker News stay above trying of define "act of war". Is it an act of war for one country to pollute air that floats over another country? Is it an act of war to launch satellites that pass over another country? These questions are governed by precise treaties today, but I can imagine politicians screaming "act of war, act of war!" at some point in the past.

It's just an arbitrary phrase used by politicians to justify whatever action or inaction they take. It will lead us to needless unproductive argument.

Post reply on HN