Bitcoin Forum
May 13, 2024, 08:57:32 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: 2013-10-17 Register: How mystery DDoSers tried to take down Bitcoin exchange  (Read 1006 times)
Arvicco (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


Please bear with me


View Profile WWW
October 17, 2013, 03:06:59 PM
 #1

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/17/bitcoin_exchange_ddos_flood/

The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715633852
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715633852

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715633852
Reply with quote  #2

1715633852
Report to moderator
1715633852
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715633852

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715633852
Reply with quote  #2

1715633852
Report to moderator
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074



View Profile
October 17, 2013, 07:08:35 PM
 #2

Is there a TCP/IP alternative that's resistant, or more uneconomic, to use for DOS attacks? This whole progression of having firms that specialise in DOS mitigation looks more and more like a protection racket business model. I understand that the Linux kernel was both designed and improved to negate the use of virus protection on the platform, despite not succeeding in elimintaing Linux viruses altogether. A similar outcome with a TCP/IP usurper would be most welcome.

Vires in numeris
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
October 17, 2013, 09:05:34 PM
 #3

Is there a TCP/IP alternative that's resistant, or more uneconomic, to use for DOS attacks? This whole progression of having firms that specialise in DOS mitigation looks more and more like a protection racket business model. I understand that the Linux kernel was both designed and improved to negate the use of virus protection on the platform, despite not succeeding in elimintaing Linux viruses altogether. A similar outcome with a TCP/IP usurper would be most welcome.
Nothing except specialized services can protect you from 100Gbps attack if your normal connection is only 1Gbps.

It simply overfloods the pipe - it works in the same manner as water. When attackers use up all your bandwidth, nothing is left for the normal traffic.

Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074



View Profile
October 17, 2013, 09:32:55 PM
 #4

Nothing except specialized services can protect you from 100Gbps attack if your normal connection is only 1Gbps.

It simply overfloods the pipe - it works in the same manner as water. When attackers use up all your bandwidth, nothing is left for the normal traffic.

Yes, I appreciate the concept of the attack vector for DOS, I'm also aware there are alternative attacks that only require low bandwidths to exploit known timeout intervals on DNS servers to deny legitimate user access. The DOS toolkit is larger than regular bandwidth flooding these days.

I have no useful insights as to how it would be done, the technical aspects of data routing at the basest level is not something that I know much about. I just find it surprising that there has been no innovation into how we solve this problem. Hacking servers with high bandwidth connections may never be completely solved, so it's tempting to think about addressing the issue from a more fundamental basis, and not just using expensive mitigation services. It just becomes an arms race then, and there's alot of potential corrupt behaviour that can stem from that.

Vires in numeris
LiteCoinGuy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010


In Satoshi I Trust


View Profile WWW
October 18, 2013, 12:13:09 PM
 #5

"Web security firm Incapsula helped a Chinese Bitcoin trader to weather a ferocious denial-of-service attack last month when the volume of inbound traffic to the site peaked at 100Gbps.

The attack against BTC China, a platform where both Bitcoin and Chinese yuan are traded, lasted nine hours and is one of the fiercest on record. But unlike the even bigger 300Gbps attack against Spamhaus back in March no amplification techniques were used in the assault against BTCChina."

The circumstances of the BTC China attack mean that the unknown assailants had a huge amount of bandwidth at their disposal. "This amount of fire power isn't cheap, or readily available, signifying a big step up in resources pulled together to launch this type of attack," according to Incapsula.



these bastards ;-)

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!