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

Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 318 posts

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#221

Post by weq »

alickz wrote: post #173
denkmoon wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mad salt. Imagine a fully grown man having a toddler tantrum. "If I can't play/win/get my way, nobody can" type mentality. It's also a method of coercion. Give me mod status or I'll DDOS your server and destroy your community. The other half comes from sever operators ddosing their competition. There is a lot of money to be made from paid cosmetics, ranks, moderator (demi-tyrant) status, etc on custom servers.

>There is a lot of money to be made from paid cosmetics, ranks, moderator (demi-tyrant) status, etc on custom servers. Anyone have any idea how much a 15 Tbps DDoS attack would cost? Thousands of dollars? Tens of thousands?

back in '98 i got a 100mb per download limit for $100 on my cable connection. i recall getting DoS'd by someone cause i was a lpb barstard in quake tf. They were kind though, only DoS'd me 90mb as a warning.... Years later, TF2 is getting DoS'd into oblivion, an extorhted by DDoS for hire. Some things change, some things stay the same.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#222

Post by BLKNSLVR »

ropable wrote: post #171
imglorp wrote: post #41

> it targeted a single endpoint in Australia. It would really help to understand why attack one endpoint with "the largest DDoS attack ever observed in the cloud". If it was important, it would be redundant in its CDN. Who paid for this attack and what did they gain?

It's just a couple of local Aussie nerds beefing again. Simmo broke up with Jonno's sister via IM, so feelings were hurt.

Is Shazza single now? Bonza!

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#223

Post by mmooss »

kachapopopow wrote: post #208
mmooss wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the risk, but the existance of risks doesn't mean they outweigh the benefits. Everything has risks.

I don't think it does outweigh the benefits, the real benefits would be punishing or/and banning vendors that do not secure their devices since using laws such as "timely updates" just promotes them to include sloppy (insecure) implementations for pushing said updates just to do bare minimum to comply with the law. relevant law here: EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA).

> I don't think it does outweigh the benefits

Fine, but that is the real discussion to have. Not 'it has this risk and therefore is bad'.

> banning vendors that do not secure their devices

I think the goal is to encourage positive behavior, not try to monitor everyone and evaluate their updates.

> promotes them to include sloppy (insecure) implementations for pushing said updates just to do bare minimum to comply with the law

I imagine the law is more than just one clause ?

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#224

Post by kjkjadksj »

tw1984 wrote: post #210
miohtama wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's national interest of China and Russia to see the West to fail. Why would they co-operate? They are willing to murder people, West and their own, so "law" enforcement means a bit different in international context.

Typical brainwashed view. It is China's national interests to see a stable America that can continue to maintain the post WWII world order that benefited China so much for so long. Without the US, who is going to maintain peace in the middle east, Africa and other places? without such peace, how could China export its goods and services? "West" != America. Your claim also implies that China and Russia are operating o…

The whole sentiment with that is china uptakes the mantle. It already is in terms of infrastructure investments, selling goods and arms, import and export agreements. The same neoliberal playbook that made the US what it is. Only from a much more focused regime with little in the way of internal division or even external threats at this point.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#225

Post by Quothling »

shoddydoordesk wrote: post #18

> 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 recently had some issues getting one of our embeded devices connect through passive ftp. Because the exact same device worked at a different site I knew it wasn't the device or it's settings. Long story short, it turned out the problematic site hadn't been updating its routers which meant they couldn't VPN passive FTP traffic. Anyway, we have literal thousands of those routers maintained by hundreds of different companies, who are mainly there to maintain the actual mechanical equipment and not the network. Turned out the site where the technicians updated things weren't in the majority.

I'm in the process of getting the business to implement better security, and it's going better than you might expect. If it wasn't because having a plan for how to update your OT security is required to meet EU compliance, however, I doubt we would've done anything beyond making sure we could do passive FTP when it was needed.

As an example, there is still no plans to deal with the OT which we know has build in hardware backdoors from the manufactures. Wnich is around 70% of our dataloggers, but the EU has no compliance rules on that...

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#226

Post by potwinkle »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #218
dylan604 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because every single nation would have to sign on to it allowing said agency to ignore sovereignty of each nation to come in and do their policing. You'd also need to have every country not actively involved in these types of schemes yet we know some governments are directly benefiting from the scams/theft their citizens are perpetrating. You'd also need to have every country think the things you want to police again…

How did we (USA) so it with copyright law?

We didn't. The WTO copyright framework is a joke that only goes after sports rebroadcasting and people who watch Disney movies for free. Meanwhile every valuable piece of US science and industry has been replicated on the other side of the planet and used for great success.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#227

Post by dijit »

m00x wrote: post #176
dijit wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

perfect, then we just nullroute at source with Flowspec, even if we change the goalposts a thousand times in this thread there does exist a technical solution to this problem. Just not enough economic or political incentive to pay for it.

It's not changing the goalpost. You're just describing a solution that are heavy-handed, yet incredibly easy to circumvent.

> How would you even enforce this if the offending country doesn't agree?

> This won't do anything. The attacks are not from the offending countries they're from botnets of compromised devices.

> It's not changing the goalpost.

fuck off.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#228

Post by potwinkle »

TZubiri wrote: post #71
kachapopopow wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

breaking the law by using wireguard to access my home network, hmm, great idea.

Ok, I'll be a bit more specific, banning businesses and the trade of proxies that are purposefully marked as residential, in order to evade firewall blocks, and even to evade proxy blocks. You gotta draw the line in the sand somewhere, VPNs are already morally dubious, but if you ban the most shady of VPNs, residential proxies, then you can at least guarantee service providers the right to deny service to proxy users…

But the botnets don't use VPNs, they use IoT devices owned by people who don't even know there's a computer inside. It seems like you just don't like the idea of VPNs in general and are using an unrelated attack to argue for deprivatizing (And thus, surveilling) the citizenry.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#229

Post by robocat »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #218
dylan604 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because every single nation would have to sign on to it allowing said agency to ignore sovereignty of each nation to come in and do their policing. You'd also need to have every country not actively involved in these types of schemes yet we know some governments are directly benefiting from the scams/theft their citizens are perpetrating. You'd also need to have every country think the things you want to police again…

How did we (USA) so it with copyright law?

Because there were large corporations using their political clout to make it a number one issue for your administration.

Your administration then made copyright law changes a central goal of many agreements - essentially a non-negotiable requirement for say a trade agreement to proceed.

Re: Azure hit by 15 Tbps DDoS attack using 500k IP addresses

#230

Post by hhh »

UnlockedSecrets wrote: post #209
hx8 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some scale, Final Fantasy XIV makes about $65 million in annual revenue (and decreasing).

According to their latest financial earnings on page 11 of https://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/ir/library/pdf/25q4slides... they made 55.5 billion yen or about $357 million. So quite a bit more revenue than $65 million

141m operating revenue for the mmo sector
Post reply on HN