Why Lizard Squad Took Down PSN and Xbox Live On Christmas Day 336
DroidJason1 writes Early Christmas morning, hacker group Lizard Squad took credit for taking down PlayStation Network and Xbox Live for hours. This affected those who had received new Xbox One or PS4 consoles, preventing them from playing online. So why did they do it? According to an exclusive interview with Lizard Squad, it had to do with convincing companies to improve their security — the hard way. "Taking down Microsoft and Sony networks shows the companies' inability to protect their consumers and instead shows their true vulnerability. Lizard Squad claims that their actions are simple, take down gaming networks for a short while, and forcing companies to upgrade their security as a result."
They're assholes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why did they do it? They're assholes.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps because they are not those assholes, as you imply?
They could have done much more harm with access to credit card information, like transfering money to many dubious locations.
So they just gave you time to think about your game consumption, and the opportunity to think about the "silent" in silent night.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Insightful)
(Waves Hand)
These are not the assholes you are looking for...
So they weren't as malicious as possible, that gives them a pass somehow?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
A pass in the sense, that they might have used the only possible solution to give these companies a hint. As those companies did not do their share in protecting their network - and their users.
In law there is a principle, that in the case of an emergency you can justify breaking law without punishment.
But, this does not justify torture, but it gives you the option to kill someone that instant this person threatens your or other human life directly.
Also those "bastards" did not impede on basic human rights,
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think at least some blame does need to be lay at the feat of Sony and Microsoft here, but not because of 'network security' but rather creating the risk in the first place where there does not need to be one.
This was basically a DDOS attack. By and large those are difficult to defend, and the usual defense is just having over whelming resources. Should everyone just go an 90% under subscribe systems just to make the DDOS proof? I don't know does not see practical.
Why do these systems need network access to play a game bought on a disk? That is the bigger question, sure I can understand only supporting multiplayer through a centralized service, my issue is with the activation and phone home crap. There is no "good" reason someone should not be able to use these things without network access for single player experiences.
Customers out realize that the system is brittle because Sony and Microsft created a hard dependency where there never needed to be one. It might not be their fault they are attacked, but they do know or should have know they are targets. Hopefully the lession they take away from this is that basic functionality should be there if you have the system and game disk fresh out of box. Maybe you can't update, download new content, do multiplayer but folks ought to be able to at least play with it even if the network is down.
That way the scope of these little disasters would be limited.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok, so there are many aspects to this - big corporation, single points of failure, 'improve security', steal credit cards/passwords, offline play, etc but there's one that stands out for me:
DDoS. Its trivially easy to send massive amounts of data at something and we have pitiful ways of mitigating it - in fact there is nothing you can do to mitigate it except buy more pipe than the attacker can fill. This is pants and isn't something the attacked companies can do anything about (except buy more pipe - which is ok if you're the size of Microsoft)
We need to start putting egress filtering in place to prevent these easy attacks, if the networks dropped all packets that didn't have a correct source IP, most DDoS would disappear as an attack (sure you'd still be able to gather lots of people/hacked machines together to instigate a DDoS but the attacker would be able to tell who they were and possibly get them fixed/cleaned for future).
The definition of a correct source IP - its an IP address the ISP owns. Its too easy to just create packets that have a random source IP or the IP of the target. We should be fixing this aspect of the internet years ago.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Another mitigation strategy would be to allow players to directly connect to each other rather than go through a central server. We were able to do this a couple of decades ago, but now we can't? Or rather, it's because the companies want to continue to control what you do after the sale, to sell you the parts of the game they "forgot" to put on the disk.
And when the servers no longer support that game that you and your friends really love because it's become a classic, you're hosed.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Interesting)
Being able to directly connect to other players is fine but you need to already know a buddy and their IP address first. You would no longer be able to connect to a random game with random people. I loved playing Doom 2 & Warcraft 2 with others but could only do it with my friend when he was home and online or we packed up our computer and took it to the other persons house.
That COULD be an option but very few people would use it today.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a secondary (or maybe it's the primary?) bonus to this tactic as well: Shut down the servers in the future and those games just stop working. They cease to be competition for the new games they're trying to sell to you.
This is the other edge of the copyright sword as well, as seen in the movies and music industry. Distribution of digital works is fast and nearly free. With thousands of years of art and entertainment available at your fingertips, why cough up hard-earned dough for rehashed crap anymo
Re: (Score:3)
These systems don't need network access to play a game bought on a disk.
The Xbox One at least used to need Internet access for first-time setup (it didn't include a final firmware image out-of-the-box) - don't know about PS4. But once that's done, you can play offline in single player or local multiplayer to your heart's content.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is true, but the issue is that is dumb! You really should be able to unbox a toy on Christmas morning have it work without going out the Internet and connecting to some account.
Maybe not all the functionality can be there, but functions that don't naturally require network access should not require network access.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If game developers build against a specific library and your console has an older version (because manufacturers have to get a firmware build to install months before launch) then it's not easy to release a game that uses both the newer, more stable, higher performance library and the older one sent months ago to get something into the manufacturer's hands.
I imagine that newer consoles all have sufficiently new firmware/libraries to allow games to run out-of-the-box but I don't think expecting launch-day ha
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The games CAN be played offline. But unfortunately, the systems (and many of the games) needed an initial patch, which they couldn't get.
My son was lucky in that he received his Xbox One on xmas eve and the updates downloaded fine. Come Xmas day, we just popped in the game disc and it ran just fine once we told the Xbox to go to offline mode.
The reason these guys are ASSHOLES is because of all those excited kids that opened their BIG present and couldn't do anything with it because the update patches coul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do these systems need network access to play a game bought on a disk? That is the bigger question, sure I can understand only supporting multiplayer through a centralized service, my issue is with the activation and phone home crap.
Consoles have long since ceased to be video game players alone.
That is why Xbox Live Status [xbox.com] posts a breakdown by services and apps.
It is perfectly possible for activation and content management services to be up while multiplayer gaming is down.
That way the scope of these little disasters would be limited.
The geek needs to remember that he pays a high price for these attacks.
"The Lizard Squad" is a perfect fit for the popular stereotype of the eternally-adolescent-and-irresponsible geek, aka the malicious practical joker, the hacker. Each hack chips away at the gee
Re: (Score:2)
Re: They're assholes. (Score:3, Insightful)
"Hey, I could have stabbed you in the eye, but instead I just beat you down. No worries you will heal and by the way, all I did was show you you need a self defense class. See how nice and helpful I am?"
Re: (Score:3)
Also those "bastards" did not impede on basic human rights, even the right to "commerce" is only slightly restricted now (it will be up and running quickly), no company will be bankrupt.
Bringing in the term "human rights" to attempt to say "well, since they didn't violate basic human rights, it's okay that they did a DDoS to point out the problems with security. That's like saying "I killed your therapy dog, but owning a dog isn't a basic human right, and I did it to point out that you need better security for your dog, so instead of getting upset you should be thanking me."
And your reference to Kim DotCom is just another red herring. Even if the handling of that case was wrong, the las
Re: They're assholes. (Score:4, Insightful)
No they couldn't. This was a ddos attack that any dumass with enough gear can acclompish. They're a bunch of adolescents trying to become rock stars. There is not one ounce of benevolence here. Sorry to inform u.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Informative)
So they just gave you time to think about your game consumption, and the opportunity to think about the "silent" in silent night.
They stopped because they were paid off. Thinking of them as noble or anything less than assholes gives them to much credit.
https://twitter.com/LizardMafi... [twitter.com]
Lizard Squad @LizardMafia 10h 10 hours ago
Thanks @KimDotcom for the vouchers--you're the reason we stopped the attacks. @MegaPrivacy is an awesome service.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I did not watch their twitter, but considering this, you are right, and I need to change my verdict.
Re: (Score:2)
I did not watch their twitter, but considering this, you are right, and I need to change my verdict.
That doesn't change the fact that you were saying it was okay for them to do this before you found out it was ransomeware - if that's even true. A post on twitter doesn't make it so.
Re: (Score:2)
Denying many people the ability to play games simply because they think they know best means they are assholes. Assholes who think that the ends justify the means, no matter who it affects.
Worse than just plain assholes, they sound like self-righteous, inconsiderate assholes.
That may not be fair ... saying someone is an inconsiderate assholes may be redundant.
Hmmm .. what do you call someone living in their mother's basement who has delusional ideas about their value to society and is willing to impact the
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe they are more like Snowden and Assange and just egotistical assholes but on a smaller scale.
Need to take a bit of exception here, but mostly because of degree and motive:
* You can agree or disagree with what Snowden did, but you cannot deny that the man acted on principle - more importantly, he put his name and his ass on the line for what he did. Note that he also could have just as easily just anonymously *sold* the info viz. Silk Road/BTC and quietly retired as a zillionare in Ecuador.
* Assange? IMHO he's a narcissistic asswipe (I base this mostly on Cryptome's assessment of Wikileaks' early dealings with them), but again, he put his name and ass out there for better or worse.
* These "lizard" guys? Script kiddies who wanted a 'rep and managed to get paid, then tried to cover it up with some nobility bullshit. Perhaps a smaller-scale version of Assange in the aspect that they wanted a reputation, but unlike Assange, they weren't willing to stick their necks out.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus their benefit vs harm ratio is kinda crap. Any idiot knows that online game stuff is vulnerable to DDOS. It's normally not a big problem because there doesn't seem to be enough money for most attackers to DDOS such stuff regularly. Most of them probably want more than vouchers from Kim Dotcom. So you cause a problem now and you don't really reduce future problems.
Whereas it seems lots of people actually didn't know the bad and evil things their governments were doing, and Assange and Snowden opened at
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Informative)
Plus their benefit vs harm ratio is kinda crap. Any idiot knows that online game stuff is vulnerable to DDOS. It's normally not a big problem because there doesn't seem to be enough money for most attackers to DDOS such stuff regularly. Most of them probably want more than vouchers from Kim Dotcom. So you cause a problem now and you don't really reduce future problems.
Whereas it seems lots of people actually didn't know the bad and evil things their governments were doing, and Assange and Snowden opened at least some of their eyes. Greater awareness of that is a step towards eventually reducing the bad stuff. It may not actually fix stuff (people might still not care), but what other better options and paths are there?
Quoted complete for greater exposure. You should have posted this under a 'nym or login, because it needs to be modded way the fuck up. :)
Re: (Score:2)
No... they are assholes.
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, here are a few points:
(1) Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) is not a security issue for the victim. It is a security issue for the thousands of computers illegally used in the attack - think thousands of illegally accessed computers, theft of the electricity and network access required to run a bot net sufficient to impact a large network like Microsoft or Sony's.
(2) Nothing the Victims security team could do would prevent a DDOS from occurring. That Microsoft or Sony's security was bad, is irrelevant to any DDOS. DDOS is like having a group of people drive bumper to bumper around your block. You can't get out, and that fancy home security system isn't going to stop the cars in the street.
(3) They were apparently in it for something other than principle as it has been pointed out that they tweeted that they received compensation to stop the DDOS. So extortion? That's not a protest at all. That's like someone getting out of one of those cars and asking you for money to make the artificially created traffic jam go away. Which is very similar to an arsonist selling protection from him burning your house down.
(4) Anyone who wanted to access the affected networks was denied access because of the DDOS. They paid for access to that network and their time on the network was essentially stolen from them. The customers who are adversely affected here are not mentioned - they are just as much victims as the corporate network. Consider for a moment that many of these people may not have much time to access the DDOS's networks due to other constraints upon their time (work, school, etc.) and were looking forward to enjoying some play time. Those plans were cancelled without recourse by the Lousy Lizard Squad and their army of stolen computers. I say stolen computers because I am pretty sure that any DDOS was not done using thousands of willing participants who signed upon on someone's website to allow the Lousy Lizard Squad to DDOS Microsoft. They are accessing other peoples property and spending other peoples resources in electricity and network access to run the DDOS attacks and that is theft of services plain and simple.
So there are four decent reasons to call these people thieves and that makes them assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Your original premise is still wrong, and has been roundly condemned, both on moral and technical grounds. Just because you reversed it based on a possibly fictitious tweet doesn't change the facts - you tried to troll, you got caught because unlike a well-done troll, you showed ignorance of the basic technology in a tech forum (about as dumb as trying to rob a donut shop next door to a police station).
Also, it's the inability for one single day, and people react like crazy kids, not taking a deep breath of fresh air or being able to relax.
You obviously still don't get it if you really believe that. But then again, you're such a lousy troll,
Re:They're assholes. (Score:4, Interesting)
Perhaps because they are not those assholes, as you imply?
They could have done much more harm with access to credit card information, like transfering money to many dubious locations.
So they just gave you time to think about your game consumption, and the opportunity to think about the "silent" in silent night.
They ARE assholes. Their excuse is as nonsensical as someone saying that they're justified in walking into my home and taking some of my stuff because I don't lock my door - or I don't have "enough" locks. Attention-seeking assholes. (and no, this DDoS does not affect me - I don't own either a sony or a microsoft console).
I can just see it - "Judge, I only held up the bank to show that they need to add more security."
If they're so concerned, why don't they work on solutions to these problems instead of acting like Santa didn't give them a pony.
BTW, they wouldn't have been able to get CC numbers just from a plain vanilla DDoS. They're not actually hacking into the servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hi. You are dumb. Very dumb. Now, being a moron, you probably don't realize just how dumb you are, so I won't hold it against you. But now that I have informed you that you are stupid, you now have a responsibility to not go around talking about things you are ignorant about (likely everything).
Simply because something is not physical does not make it not real. And, in actuality this "attack" was as physical as a door. Routers are physical, switches are physical, computers are physical even if their OS has
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had modpoints, because this is definitely underrated.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
A door and windows are real.
It's idiots like you, who think that businesses, networks, people's entertainment time, and the like "aren't real" that give comfort and encouragement to idiots like the guys who pulled this. They did it to be dicks, just like other dicks might throw a rock through your window and nail your TV right before you were going to watch the World Cup match you've been waiting weeks to watch with your friends. Or, in a closer analogy, waiting until moments before the game starts, and then cutting the cable that services your house or apartment building.
Let me guess: that soccer game's not real! They're not at the stadium in person, so denying them the chance to watch it as they planned isn't actually harmful! Destruction of the time someone plans to use in a certain way is a theft more real, in many ways, than stealing physical objects. You'll never be able to replace the time. Which is one of the reasons these guys are dicks. Deliberate, purposeful, not noble in any way, dicks.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if it was by throwing ".net.wpf.windows.break()"
You should make a difference between virtual and real.
A door and windows are real.
Why? On the same basis I should be able to empty your bank account because the money in it isn't real - first, it's only digits in a computer, and second, it's a fiat currency, backed by faith and trust, not real assets.
Note to Sheldon Cooper: If we ever reach the singularity, remember to wipe out this person's virtual self after his body is dead because as far as they're concerned "it's not real".
Re: (Score:2)
No, that was sony. [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
All they did was download an illegal program [...]
Illegal program. LOL.
ping is illegal? Wow. So linux, freeBSD, Apple and Microsoft have been distributing illegal programs? Quick - call in the FBI!
Re: (Score:2)
This is the real crime here. That ignorant people actually think these wannabes are real hackers.
Well, what more can you expect from a wannabe troll?
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect argumentation isn't your strongest skill ?
Switching from one weak "justification" to another as each one gets knocked down, and displaying your ignorance of the basic technology involved shows that trolling isn't your strongest skill. Next time, leave it to the pros.
dickheads (Score:2)
Agreed.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, think of the children !
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, think of the children !
Narcissistic people like this, with a warped moral compass, you DON'T want them thinking of your children. Unless you think Luka Magnotta or Jeffrey Dahmer would make good babysitters ...
Re:They're assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
The only victims here are the users who bought into a DRM'ed, locked down platform.
You're right, all those people should have chosen to buy fun, well-developed, richly supported gaming platforms from one of the many providers who offer open source, freedom-minded, anti-IP, systems that have a large selection of really cool massive multiplayer games with giant networks supporting all of that activity. There are so many to choose from that I'm sure it's why you just didn't have time to list them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't steal
Sure they did. They stole time from millions of people. They deliberately screwed with the expectations and plans of millions of people, all for a little bit of cash and bragging rights among their fellow assholes.
Re: (Score:3)
The real assholes here are MS and Sony for knowingly maintaining insecure networks even after Lizard Squad already took them down and publicly warned that it was but a taste of what was to come on Christmas.
A very secure system can still be overwhelmed by an attacking system. It's a more secure design to safely shut down when being over whelmed than to "turn off" security and just let the information flow. So being taken down by a DDoS does not an insecure network make.
Re: (Score:3)
Total bullshit. They DDOS'ed the gaming servers. That's not "insecure" that's just overwhelmed. That's like saying that your bank account is insecure because protesters can chain themselves to the door handles and prevent you from entering the building. It is far more expensive to secure your servers against random bursts of demand because they shouldn't and can't really protect against it. It would be like saying "well I shot up your house to prove how weak your walls and windows are." No shit. I'
Ahh ok (Score:3)
Well since you are clearly a network security expert, please tell us how to secure a network against being taken out be a DDoS attack. Then post your IP, we'll see how you fair. Remember, you are the asshole and deserve Legal Penalties with Scary Caps if you can't stop it.
Here's a hint: There is no security against a DDoS attack. That's why assholes like Lizard Squad use them.
Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Rubbish (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Rubbish (Score:4, Insightful)
Nonsense. On their gaming systems you are unlikely to find any data that the companies would consider valuable. And 10+ years of experience show that "oops, we leaked customer data" isn't really a game-changer.
But cries from customers can be. Denying them the joy of their freshly gifted gaming console can be very powerful. It's not the nice way, definitely not, but it makes headlines.
I doubt it's going to change anything, because customers are too used to computers not working. That is the real damage that 30 years of Microsoft dominance have done to the world.
Re: (Score:2)
because customers are too used to computers not working
Go ahead and down mod me, but I don't think that is a bad thing... At one point in my career I worked at a PCI compliant company that handled CC transactions, and I was astounded at the "bailing wire and duct tape" way those CC transactions happened... Things would stop working quite regularly. It gave me a whole new insight into what happens when you swipe your card, standing there blissfully unaware of what it takes for things behind the scenes to work.
It really is quite a miracle that a lot of thi
Re: (Score:2)
More to the point, you can't just hack /any/ data. Stealing customer's personal information, credit card numbers, or similar doesn't phase the corporations either; sure it causes them a bit of bad PR, but ultimately the cost of the hack is paid by their customers, not by the corporation itself. In fact, seeing as how common the "we stole your entire customer database" sort of hacks are becoming, even the negative PR is becoming minimized; after all, as /everybody/ is seemingly getting hacked in that way, so
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pranks have to be funny. What is funny about DDOS?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, DDOS today pretty much belong in the realm of vandalism and script kiddies. Sadly, it is still a low skill-high damage attack.
Accidental infringement (Score:3)
Would copyright infringement be a valid form of protest if the incumbent music publishers start suing indie songwriters on trumped-up charges of creating a derivative work by accident? (For example, Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music)
Such nobility (Score:5, Funny)
Given such lofty and noble intentions I'm sure they will be making their names known any day now so that the public can thank them for thei civil service...
Consoles are worthless offline (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I played a game yesterday, but it wasn't on the new consoles. I played a game on my xbox 360 and it signed into live with no issues yesterday morning.
I was surprised to read the xbox live went down, as I was using it yesterday!
Re: (Score:2)
I pay for something but then can't enjoy it unless I have a connection to the internet? WTF?!?
Yes, I understand not all games are like this, but it gets worse every year.
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily there are other games to play.
Re: (Score:3)
That's because Destiny is an MMO-shooter.
Security is NOT the issue here. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
So they wouldn't mind if someone broke into their houses? Since, you know, it was just to force them to upgrade their security.
Denying people access to these services repeatedly is about being griefers not caring about the users' security.
Glad to hear it's not their just pathetic jerks (Score:5, Insightful)
So they ruin the day both for thousands of kids with new consoles and the tech support/security teams for the companies who now have to come in to work on Christmas. I have another theory why they do this on Christmas -- this group of hackers (at a psychological level) are just sad and lonely people who are angry with the world and want to ruin the joy/fun for others.
Re: (Score:3)
They are jerks. This is just post hoc bullshit to try to paint themselves as white knights.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course that's not a good thing. By that reasoning the parents shouldn't have gotten them an xbox in the first place. It's not a public service to take away the toys that you, personally, disapprove of.
December 25 is not known for its good weather in much of the world where Xboxes are sold.
For that, you'd have to do a different attack (Score:5, Insightful)
All a DoS does is prove one thing: That you can field more bandwidth than your target. Unless of course it's one where you exploit the weakness of a target system (e.g. by shutting down a service deliberately using an exploit). Else, a DoS proves little.
If a DoS exposes any kind of security issue, then a global one: That there are techniques that allow you to use little bandwidth on your end to cause the other end to drown in traffic. There are a few documented ways how you could pull this off, the most trivial one would be to spoof the IP address of your target system with some server that sends back a ton of info for a tiny request. E.g, DNS. Such an attack doesn't prove that the target system is vulnerable, it proves that the DNS protocol itself is beyond repair (and yes, it is, and there are secure replacements but ... you know, it's the internet... it works, changing stuff costs money, so...).
So what does the attack prove? Well, I wish I could say it proves without a doubt that MS and Sony have a security that matches the opaqueness of an erotic dancer's dress and should up their security (well, they do, and they should, but this attack doesn't prove that). It proves that we use technology that makes such an attack not only possible but actually trivial. And that EVERY company on the net is susceptible to something like that because unlimited bandwidth does not exist.
Re: (Score:2)
spoof the IP address of your target (...) it proves that the DNS protocol itself is beyond repair
No, it proves that the network you are connected to is braindead because it still allows IP spoofing.
And that EVERY company on the net is susceptible to something like that because unlimited bandwidth does not exist.
It used to be really easy to knock someone off the Internet. It's not so easy anymore. For some of the really big targets, being able to muster the bandwidth alone would be an impressive demonstration of power. Keeping them offline for more than a few seconds while their Anti-DDoS countermeasures deploy would be something that few players smaller than a nation state level can pull off.
MS and Sony have a security that matches the opaqueness of an erotic dancer's dress
Not really. I hate them
Re: For that, you'd have to do a different attack (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh christ, this again? (Score:5, Insightful)
"We're trying to get shopkeepers to install stronger windows", said the kid throwing bricks.
Modern day bullies (Score:2)
These kids get picked on in school and they are ill equipped to figure out how to handle it. So, they dump their teenage angst by being bullies themselves. As others have already stated, this was no "hack". It was a DDoS and it will likely never compel the affected companies to modify their "security". And their actions gain no sympathy amongst the end users. Few people are likely to take their new consoles back to the store and trade them in for (insert non-electronic somethingsomething here). And the atta
Funniest part for me: The error message in the PS3 (Score:5, Insightful)
The greatest part of this is the error message I got when trying to do the update for PS Home in my PS3.
The possible errors where: My ISP, my internet connection, my router.
Funny how they never admit the problem could come from their side, it reminds me exactly the process I have to go trough about every time I need to go to my lab's IT office to get something fixed... now, it obviously can't be their system's fault. The system put in place by the IT department is obviously perfect, it's us - the lousy users - that are obviously doing something wrong.
Re:Funniest part for me: The error message in the (Score:4, Interesting)
Ddos doesn't demonstrate security issues (Score:4, Insightful)
Ways to protect vs DDoS (Score:2, Informative)
Per my subject vs. many kinds of DoS/DDoS - Defensive measures that work:
Microsoft Windows NT-based OS settings vs. DDoS/DoS:
Protect Against SYN Attacks
FROM -> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-u... [microsoft.com]
A SYN attack exploits a vulnerability in the TCP/IP connection establishment mechanism. To mount a SYN flood attack, an attacker uses a program to send a flood of TCP SYN requests to fill the pending connection queue on the server. This prevents other users from establishing network connections.
To protect the netwo
Re: (Score:3)
Let me see if I've got this right: did you really just suggest the DDOS attacks against Microsoft's Xbox Live would be mitigated if only they follow the recommendations of Microsoft? (Slow clap) Now that's some top grade shilling.
Re:Ways to protect vs DDoS (Score:5, Interesting)
None of these protect against a volume-oriented DDoS. Many are DoS only (single / few sources) and do not apply when every IP on the Internet appears to be sending thousands of requests, or more likely, responses. Further, you've completely ignored spoofing of addresses combined with amplification attacks (send out a 64 byte DNS request pretending to be the DDoS target, get 4kB sent to the target). Finally, regardless of the 50-100Gbps pipes MS, Sony and Amazon no doubt have, they're useless when there's 1Tbps of amplified crap directed down the pipes. With the example above, you'd only need about 4Gbps of bandwidth total (40 cheap VPS on "100Mbps" connections) to generate 256Gbps of DDoS.
When 256Gbps of rubbish arrives at your servers or firewalls ... registry settings and kernel tweaks do jack (note that CloudFlare was hit 11 months ago with more than 400Gbps of DDoS, so this is not implausible!)
And since it seems it was apk I'm replying to ... I'm actually half surprised you didn't try to claim that a HOSTS file would magically help.
Let's apply the same logic to these assholes (Score:2)
The real reason they attacked is quite simple. They're antisocial, immature pricks. If they ever get caught you just know these losers will play the asperger's card in their defence.
morons... (Score:2)
How did they show with ddos that the security is lacking? they didn't hack the servers... They are just a couple of morons who only want attention, nothing more nothing less..
And propably it wasn't even that hard, because everybody could have predicted that the servers would already be at full load on christmas day, so simple ddos would topple it..
But the only thing they did, was getting people to hate them even more..
But how did they get an interview if noone knows who they are? Get the bastards and crippl
I doubt this is true, BUT.... (Score:2)
At the same time, we should be suing retailers, along with the CIO and CEOs, that have lost CCs.
But DDOS's don't leak customer data (Score:2)
The consumers are at fault (Score:2)
for supporting systems that need to be activated in order to use what you paid for. I wanted to get a Roku media player, well after reading some insane thing about having to phone in to activate your hardware if you didn't want to give out your credit card to activate, it I said fuck it. Its insane that I have to activate hardware before I use it. I have no desire for the company to know my name or other personal. Its none of their business unless I want to deal with warranty issues.
morons (Score:2)
And they didn't prove shit (Score:2)
DDOS attack doesn't prove shit about security. Fucking little script kiddies. This was a case of the bullied bullying someone else for a change. Grow some dicks and go stick it in something, losers.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's give them the benefit of doubt and say they chose networks that are of no strategic significance. What do you think would have gone down if they targeted, say, VISA or MC during the holidays?
At least that's what I'd do. I sure as hell don't want every three letter agency on my ass just for proving a point. And it's doubtful that they will send the marines after you for kicking off some gaming platforms. Might be different if you shut down a key payment system during the most busy time of the year.
Re: (Score:2)
this raises the issue again of the always-on-line model for current gen gaming.
Now that would have been an excellent point to make, and a DDoS attack would be a good way to demonstrate the point.
Re: (Score:2)
And that's the reason I don't engage in such activities. It usually backfires. People's reaction is not to blame the companies for shot security, they start crying for stricter laws (as if that accomplished dick). People are stupid, and I will not fix that. I had to accept that a long time ago.
Plus, companies being insecure is good for my business, so I really have no reason at all anymore to get worked up over it.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, it's not even about people being stupid.
This group overloaded servers - there was no security breach.
If I was a consumer, would I blame
A) The group of people that on purpose overloaded the servers
B) The company for not having invested in more servers that are only used because assholes are deliberately trying to overload their servers and ruin my day (and who would cover the cost of the additional - usually unneeded - servers)
Re:It would be nice... (Score:4, Interesting)