Live data from Hacker News

Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

bloomberg.com

81–90 of 206 posts

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's hard to get an ISP to disable a service for one of their paying customers to help other people on the Internet who aren't paying them.

Why can't everyone else then block the customer? Get the big 5 tech companies to block IPs that are shown to do DDOS, for say a 24hr period, and you will see how quickly they unplug that IOT Toaster

Not very quickly? First, you wouldn't know why you were disconnected. You would try the standard things first (plug and unplug your router, etc). Then maybe after a while you would call your ISP. Get put on hold a bunch. Your ISP tech support probably won't know much either, since in your scenario it isn't the ISP doing the blocking. They MIGHT test the connection, or maybe they just give the customer a new IP address.

It is going to take quite a while in this scenario for the user to realize it is their IoT toaster that is causing the issue.

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These attacks are mostly possible because of the complacency of operators at many sites and companies. This is not a new problem and many of RFC's talk about methods for preventing and mitigating them, but most people don't care and prefer to just outsource everything to a single provider, which becomes the weakest link. The Internet wasn't envisioned with a single email provider, single DNS provider, single app cont…

The problem with these devices in particular is the weak point is the user. As is the case in most attacks. Your average user says "Sure I can setup cameras" then sees "remote access" in the menu, sets it up, maybe it has some UPNP to the router and BOOM. Magic remote login without any type of mitigation.

Exactly, I have tons of IOT devices. I put them on a separate subnet that does not have a gateway to the internet then I VPN into that network to access them. Perhaps a product that makes that a simple process will solve the problem?

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These attacks are mostly possible because of the complacency of operators at many sites and companies. This is not a new problem and many of RFC's talk about methods for preventing and mitigating them, but most people don't care and prefer to just outsource everything to a single provider, which becomes the weakest link. The Internet wasn't envisioned with a single email provider, single DNS provider, single app cont…

The problem with these devices in particular is the weak point is the user. As is the case in most attacks. Your average user says "Sure I can setup cameras" then sees "remote access" in the menu, sets it up, maybe it has some UPNP to the router and BOOM. Magic remote login without any type of mitigation.

[deleted]

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's hard to get an ISP to disable a service for one of their paying customers to help other people on the Internet who aren't paying them.

Why can't everyone else then block the customer? Get the big 5 tech companies to block IPs that are shown to do DDOS, for say a 24hr period, and you will see how quickly they unplug that IOT Toaster

Speaking as not-me, the average, non-technical homeowner who just installed his new internet connected washing machine at home.

Great, now I can throw in a load and get a notice on my phone when it's done. This is awesome! (3 hours later) Wait, why can't I get to the internet? I call my ISP, they tell me that my connection is fine (it's tech support, they aren't security experts). But, I tell them, Google doesn't work for me. They do some tests, everything should work. I bitch, moan, cry a little, rage quite my ISP and sign up with someone new. It works for a few days until my washing machine (having been offline for a bit) gets exploited again.

I still don't have a clue as to why I'm being blocked from Google and company. Maybe they kick back a message as a 4xx (what would be appropriate?) that says my network has been hacked. But I've seen those sorts of things all the time in ads, I know that's just someone trying to scam me, convince me to run something that'll install a virus on my computer.

Must be my computer! Damn Dell piece of shit. I can't afford a new one. Maybe that neighbor kid can come over again and help me out with this.

($200 and several trips for the neighbor kid later it's still not solved)

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#85

I'm suggesting this just so someone more knowledgeable can debunk it. Suppose FBI or someone up there had a meeting and said "in three weeks, there could be millions of armed Americans who believe that democracy was just stolen from them by some evil dictator in a massive globalist conspiracy. These people love twitter. Is there a way to make twitter go down without making it look like we're suddenly pulling the plug…

Do you really think of twitter as the center of right-wing lunacy?

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#86

I'm suggesting this just so someone more knowledgeable can debunk it. Suppose FBI or someone up there had a meeting and said "in three weeks, there could be millions of armed Americans who believe that democracy was just stolen from them by some evil dictator in a massive globalist conspiracy. These people love twitter. Is there a way to make twitter go down without making it look like we're suddenly pulling the plug…

Why do a test run at all? So that every security expert is on edge when it does happen?

... Perhaps if you try to argue that they did it in order to make sure everyone was on edge for the election... but even then it makes very little sense.

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#87
post #4

For a long time, I've wondered what would finally be the Securitypocalypse, the thing that finally caused our industry as a whole to take security seriously. These IoT DDoS attacks are as good a candidate as any I've seen in a long time. They are fundamentally very difficult to fix in light of the non-updateability of many of these devices, and this is only the beginning, because the IoT has hardly begun to develop.…

> For a long time, I've wondered what would finally be the Securitypocalypse, the thing that finally caused our industry as a whole to take security seriously.

Nothing. If the economic system revolves around capital's valorization of itself, security is a distraction from that. I have to spend five seconds typing my password in every time I sit at my desk? I can't just easily e-mail this executable file to my co-worker and have them run it? My desktop is locked down by the desktop admins to prevent me being able to do this, and many other things? Every implementation of security costs money for the personnel to do it and possibly the product cost. Plus any lost productivity it might cause (15 seconds to type in a password each time one sits at their desk, compounded).

Donn Parker wrote one of the first books on computer security in 1976, Crime by Computer. The opening words are as apt for corporate security now as it was then. The #1 fear for the corporate manager are the employees of that company. They are the ones with the greatest control over the means of production, so to speak, even more than the managers themselves who are de jure in charge, but are de facto one step away from actual control. Look at how much access someone like Snowden had at Booz Allen.

Obviously, if all products have wide open holes, script kiddies will be able to get control. Some minimal security will always be done to stop this sort of thing. On the other hand, one (or better yet, several) dedicated people who want to get past some security arrangement can almost always get in. Even if the firewall is supposedly impenetrable, the wifi or the building security or the social engineering credulity of employees or something will be there. There will be some weak link in the chain. Especially for a company that needs to make a profit.

The real security is that semi-intelligent, persistent agents that seek to access and control systems without authorization are lacking. Things depend on the conditions that cause this to rise or diminish. Because once it rises, there is little that can be done. I forget who said that the czar's Russian Okhrana was one of the largest, most extensive security forces that existed. That meant little when Russia began collapsing in 1916 though - all it meant was that they were even more aware that virtually everyone in the country was becoming the czar's enemy.

Securitypocalypse events due result in business and government putting more focus on security for a while, but time moves on, and attention drifts back to the main focus. These things go in waves, and total security is never something of the highest priority.

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's fair to block the entire network. It is then up to the network administrator to fix the problematic device.

While technically accurate to describe them as such, the vast majority of consumers (and internet service subscribers) lack the actual technical expertise to be network administrators. Where these devices are being attacked inside, ostensibly, professional organizations (companies, schools, government buildings), I agree. But there you have, again ostensibly, an actual network administrator capable of dealing with th…

I think that's okay.

We don't expect all homeowners to be, say, experts in electrical wiring, or gas supply, plumbing, drainage, or waste management. But all of these things—if they are poorly modified, managed, or maintained—can cause impacts on third parties. In the case of networked devices, the possible impact on third parties is even greater. We also enforce strong regulation on these systems – defining what may and may not be legally connected to public utility networks, for example.

We would probably expect a homeowner to hire a tradesperson to maintain these services, and in some cases it's legally mandated that only a qualified person may install or modify these systems. Is it then unreasonable to kick consumers off of the Internet when they install poorly-maintained devices, and require them to resolve the problem – perhaps by hiring the networking equivalent of a qualified plumber?

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#89
These attacks are possible because the US Congress hasn't extended tort liability to manufacturers of software and network hardware. The full weight of the US products liability bar will quickly and rapidly motivate manufacturers to ship secure devices. The lack of accountability is enabling vulnerability.

Re: Possible Vendetta Behind the East Coast Web Slowdown

#90
post #5

Unfortunately, forced firmware updating is an area our governments should not be mandating. That puts unnecessary strain on small companies and creates a larger gap that companies must cross to become commercially viable

> Unfortunately, forced firmware updating is an area our governments should not be mandating. It absolutely is an area that governments should be mandating, because the problem is an externality. These attacks are a cost imposed on neither the producer nor the consumer of the device itself, and (apart from some highly speculative libertarian conjectures) the only things that can fix externalities are taxes, regulatio…

But then there is also the risk of government mandating a firmware update that has government features.
Post reply on HN