Slashdot Mirror


DoS Attacks Persisting, On The Rise

thelizman writes "One of the most basic "hacks" (to use the media's bastardization of the term) is a Denial of Service attack. While not getting you any access to data on a machine, DoS attacks effectively shut down machines by making them inaccessable to others. CNN is carrying and IDG.net story about how DoS attacks are still one of the leading threats on the Internet, and are actually on the rise as the sophistication of the attacks increases." We get them constantly- some intentional, some not. It's really a pain.

41 of 287 comments (clear)

  1. DOS is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everyone at my company has upgraded to Windows 3.1. I don't know why Slashdot is still talking about DOS

    1. Re:DOS is dead by issachar · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'm not asking on a moral ground, but could a Lawyer actually get that to court?

      probably not if the judge has any sense at all.

      There's a fundamental difference between a DoS or DDoS attack and the so-called /. effect. In the first two cases, the attacks generally come from remote controlled machines or zombie machines and is instigated by a very few number of people, or even just one person. In the case of the /. effect, each and every viewing of the webpage is deliberately instigated by a separate human being.

      While most analogies of /. suck, I'll add one more: It's somewhat akin to the difference between a half dozen people chaining themselves to the entrance of a Starbucks and stopping people from entering as a means of protesting globalization and a couple hundred people all trying to get in at once because a radio DJ points out that they're selling double-shot mochas for a penny each.

      --
      . --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
    2. Re:DOS is dead by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "In the case of the /. effect, each and every viewing of the webpage is deliberately instigated by a separate human being."

      But what if a Lawyer made an argument along the lines of: "Slashdot intentionally posted a link to their site knowing that an overwhelming increase of traffic would hit my client's servers."? What if Blizzard, for example, attempted to sue Taco because of being flooded with too many hits (or negative emails) from opinions posted on Slashdot?

      The difference between Slashdot and a news site such as CNN is that more opinions make their way to the front page. For example, remember the article that said MS kicked Sony out of CeBit? That's not what happened, but that was the view it posted.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    3. Re:DOS is dead by epsalon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ofcourse it's dead. Microsoft has released DDoS (aka WinXP).

    4. Re:DOS is dead by hoggoth · · Score: 3, Funny

      > > "Everyone at my company has upgraded to Windows 3.1. I don't know why Slashdot is still talking about DOS"

      > Though I would agree that DOS is probably inhibiting people from getting data off certain sites off the net, they're talking about DoS.

      I read in Discover about someone with damage his right frontal lobe that couldn't understand humor. I guess you've taken one too many shots to the forehead, huh?

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:DOS is dead by Monkeyman334 · · Score: 3, Informative

      These are numbers from last year, so I'd imagine they're a little bit higher. Slashdot had 1.2 million page views a day. Between the halt of classic.themes.org and the new one, t.o was getting about 120,000 page views a day. When an article was posted on slashdot saying "help *link*themes.org" it jumped up over 300,000 for a day or so and went down over a week or two to get back to 120,000. The guy that humiliated bernard shiffman also documented his slashdot experience, pretty interesting stuff.

  2. Wait until.. by Steveftoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    someone writes a virus that spreads through the Kazaa or gnutella network. That will be a fun day.

    p2p is the biggest ddos mess waiting to happen. If there is a hole in the client, then who knows how far it could spread before stopping.

    1. Re:Wait until.. by dankow · · Score: 3, Funny

      someone writes a virus that spreads through the Kazaa or gnutella network. I thought Kazaa was a virus.

      --
      I am the hub of Jack's digital lifestyle.
    2. Re:Wait until.. by Liquor · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The Kazaa and Gnutella networks are protocols.
      No, they are many computers running programs that implement protocols.
      Protocols can't catch viruses.
      True. Unfortunately, the Kazaa program installs more than one protocol handler - one is the file sharing protocol itself, and another is a 'distributed computing' facility that allows (theoretically only the Kazaa servers, but...) remote control of the machine. Compromising this functionality would allow distributing malware through the entire network.
      Now if you're talkinga 'bout attacking specific flaws in Kazaa client software, or Gnutella software, then so be it - but that's not the network!
      Well, if you infect all the machines that make up a network using a flaw in the code that creates that network, I'd have to say that the network is infected. And if there is an attack that works on any client, then the first machine compromised already knows the addresses of more machines... worm code that uses the network topology (which is NOT the protocol) could then propagate to the entire network - potentially millions of machines, dwarfing the scale of even the 'code red' worm.

      And if that's not effectively spreading through the network, I don't know what would be.
      Moderate this fool back to 1.
      The parent of your post is not the fool - but you definitely failed to understand the post.

      --

      Liquor
      Sanity is a highly overrated commodity.
  3. Slashdot is one BIG DOS attack by NickV · · Score: 3, Funny

    /. has gotten more popular! That's probably why we're seeing more DOS attacks! I mean, there's been one (Linux PVRs) today already.

    Or, maybe not...

  4. aka the Slashdot Effect by CaseStudy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Get them? You produce them constantly.

  5. DoS sucks by El+Volio · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having been on of the admins for a pretty large website (top 50 according to Media Metrix), I can definitely state that DoS attacks are a royal pain. Sure, you can throw infrastructure at a problem and alleviate it, but you can't defeat it -- and they just keep coming. It's the type of attack I've never understood: it doesn't gain the attacker anything (unlike rooting a box), it's nothing but being a hoodlum.

    --

    "You can never have too many elephants on your team."

  6. Attention Slashdot by crystalplague · · Score: 3, Funny

    In exchange for the halting of DoS attacks on Slashdot...I demand 1 free subscription to yours truly. If you do not submit to my demand, you will feel the full wrath that is my 31337 |-|@X0r SkI11z.

    Muwahahahaha!

  7. Stupid script kiddies. by dadragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing that really bugs me about DOS attacks, besides the fact that they cause damage and annoy admins, is that they don't show any real talent.

    It's not impressive to bring a system to its knees by DOSing it. You do, however have to respect the guy who discovers some huge hole that he exploits on some system and gains access.

    You gotta respect him more if he tells you about it, and how to fix it.

    --
    God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  8. HOW CAN YOU BE LEET WITH DOS by Burritos · · Score: 3, Funny

    How can one hack with DOS? You need Linux to be a hax0r

  9. In related news... by dR.fuZZo · · Score: 3, Funny

    A recent study has shown that there's a direct correlation between the number of denial of service attacks reported and the number of stories Slashdot posts in a day.

    --
    -- dR.fuZZo
  10. Re:Intentional? by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Isn't an unintentional attack an oxymoron? Like an intentional accident"

    If I was doing a ballet move and slapped you in the face, would you rather label that as an accident or tell people that I used my powerful ballet technique to bitch slap you?

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  11. DrDoS by ZaneMcAuley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Distributed Reflection Denial of Service

    http://grc.com/dos/drdos.htm

    Looks nasty :D

    --
    ----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
    1. Re:DrDoS by Osty · · Score: 3, Informative

      Steve Gibson is a kook and a crackpot. He's an alarmist, but unfortunately people not "in the know" tend to listen to him (most likely because he is an alarmist). He rails against raw sockets in XP, never bothering to notice that NT (which XP is based upon) has had raw sockets for a long time, and that it's possible to modify the Win9x TCP/IP stack to allow for raw socket-like abilities. Nevermind that raw sockets are only available to administrative users in NT, as with any *nix (problem -- too many users run with administrative rights on NT, which is the equivalent of running as root all the time. This is the true problem, not raw sockets, and should be the one that's addressed). His "Distributed Reflection" DoS is nothing new. Hax0rs and kiddies have been doing it for a while. His GENESIS project is basically poorly-implemented SYN cookie protection. And so on and so on ...


      In short, the guy's a nut and only nut's pay attention to him. Try a real security site, like SecurityFocus.

    2. Re:DrDoS by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I don't think you realise how different servers are to desktops. XP is being used by your average 12:00 flasher, while NT is typically used by the most computer literate person in the company. For every NT box out there you're looking at maybe 50 desktops, many of which will soon be XP. DDOS is a numbers game, so anything that increases the proportion of powerful, badly maintained PCs that can craft any damn packet they feel like this not a good thing.

      Sure, SG is paranoid, but in a good way. He hasn't reached the kook level just yet. When he starts promoting cold fusion, then you can back away slowly.

    3. Re:DrDoS by CaptainStormfield · · Score: 3, Funny

      When he starts promoting cold fusion, then you can back away slowly.

      Unless he really is performing cold fusion, in case you should run away quickly or put on some lead pants.

      --
      "The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
    4. Re:DrDoS by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

      I still agree with the orignal poster that he's a huge alarmist and a sensationalist. Look at his whole shtick on "NanoProbes" (http://grc.com/np/np.htm). He talks about this like it is some new-to-the-world technology. When you read through all the marketing bullshit you come to realise it is nothing more than sending things like empty syn packets and stuff nmap and the like have done for years.

      Gibson has a real overinflated sense of his own importance and loves to make it sound like all his discoveries are huge and that the consequences of not obeying his advice are dire. However you begin to notice that he is never mentioned in any of the big security news. He's a smart guy and a deceant programmer, no doubt, but he lets his ego get in the way of his good judgement and has a tendency to exegarate the truth.

  12. MS-DOS by knuu · · Score: 3, Funny


    WRT this: If someone 0wned the Windows Update server and used it for a DoS attack on other servers, would that be called an MS-DoS attack?

    1. Re:MS-DOS by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Funny

      "If someone 0wned the Windows Update server and used it for a DoS attack..."

      I th1nk the reas0n tha+ hackerZ d0n't use M$ s0ftware iZ +hat m0st 0f everyth1ng they wr1te w0uld have squ1ggly lineZ under it.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  13. Re:Taco, why do you say such things? by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "So why are you claiming the media bastardizes the term when this author actually uses the correct terminology?"

    Because the 'media' is a representation of the entire news broadcasting world and not the individual author?

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  14. The future of DDoS as told by Gibson by marekk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A very engrossing read can be found at Steve Gibson's homepage of his account of the DDoS attack grc.com was subjected to earlier this year.

    In effect, Gibson tracked down the 13 year-old attacker by dissecting the zombie program (aka, trojan bot) used in the attacks and created his own version of the undercover bot to monitor the hacker's IRC channels and conversations. As I said before, an extremely interesting read. It really brings out the urgency of Gibson's alerts as to the future of DDoS attacks.

    1. Re:The future of DDoS as told by Gibson by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  15. hrm, more bandwidth for the consumer? by Sase · · Score: 4, Informative

    Will there ever be an end to Dos Attacks?

    I don't think there can be.

    If you look at the TCP/IP, and most importantly IP protocol, there is nothing you can do.

    Some would say have a 'supersmart' router that would kill all packets that are from the same host.. but what's the point.. what if the router fills up its buffer?///...

    It's like McDonalds at lunch... everyone gets there at the same time.. they all want something, they're going to pay (in a DoS attack, this is what it *looks*like, but its really one person doing this) so the lines get long.. Poor me can't get lunch as fast a possible..
    there's nothing we can do to solve the problem unfortunately.

    The only real solution is to beef up security on as many systems as possible. Once this is done, a hacker can't get the resources in order to launch a big DoS attack.

    This is a really hard task, of course... but maybe security should be more of a main focus on the home desktop systems, especially since broadband is getting so easy to obtain.

    Another reason why M$ needs to get their thumbs out of their a$$e$ and release more secure OS's... Open Source is already trying to actively take care of the problem :)

    Whee
    -Sase

    --
    ------------
    Sase
    "It's the opposite of that."
  16. Poorly managed networks are a problem too. by LojaK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the most common problems I've encountered in my years as a systems administrator is poorly managed networks. If a network is designed without the presence of mind anticpating DoS attacks, then frankly, the victim company deserves *some* of the blame for the problem.

    One mid-sized ISP I worked for had been operating for 5 years prior to my employ and the network operators had never heard of monitoring tools like MRTG, RRDTool, Netsaint or Big Brother etc etc!

    "We do it to ourselves and that's what really hurts" -- Radio Head.

    -- Steve.

  17. Academically boring by Tim+Ward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I went to a talk by Roger Needham (a few years ago now, I don't know if this is still his view) on secure protocols. Lots of interesting stuff on strategies for designing secure protocols and algorithms, and theoretical attacks and so on.

    But just passing mention of DOS attacks - these are boring to academics because they are easy to do and impossible to counter so there's no research to do and no papers to write.

    (I paraphrase slightly, and I probably remember the details wrong anyway, so any flaming should be directed at me, not Roger.)

  18. Starting to get into Commercialization by BakaMark · · Score: 4, Interesting
    DOS attacks are rarely about sophistication - it's pure destructive potential.

    Sometimes you have to wonder about some of the targets of these DOS attacks and how they are organised.

    Some of the major ones are obvious, Microsoft, Ebay, Yahoo, etc. But when you start to get to the small to medium sized companies being hit by large DOS attacks, because their systems are sufficiently patched against break-ins, something begins to become worrying.

    The questions range from why such a small target for such a large attack, and how the target was selected. Occasionally you get to hear stories about how some small ISP had their lines choked by a huge DDOS, meaning that customers started leaving and going to the competition. There is one other post elsewhere here that identified that a British ISP was put out of business because of the efforts of continous DOS attacks.

    Spite sometimes is a factor, but it takes a certain degree of organisation to launch a continous attack such as that. Spite of someone will only get you so far. And there is not that much prestige in taking out a medium sized company. After all within the current climate, medium sized and some large sized companies are finding it harder to remain in business from an economic sense.

  19. Our own webserver by yoink! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Through by no means has our little webserver been hit by DoS attacks (it is way to low profile, and not listed under any search engines), we nonetheless get about 3000 hits monthly trying to exploit a windows-based webserver.

    We have been lucky that we run Apache on a Linux box, which also happens to be on a DSL line, limiting upstream bandwidth. And although 3k hits is minimal, there are only about 10 regular users of the website, which is maintained for downloading test files for music production inside our group only. All the exploits are rediculously similar, each one trying to access C:\ or D:\ or a Windows NT directory. I'm sure that this must be very common... and I can't image what these major sites must deal with on an hourly basis.

    I find it sad though, that altogether too many webservers are managed by people who just aren't worried about this type of happening. The web remains the wild-west of the electronic frontier, brothels ;-) and all. Since many of us are against a global policing body, we, at the very least, need to make sure the alarms and defences on our own properties are capable and effective.

  20. Why always blame the scriptkiddies? by Sarin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why does everyone allways accuse the scriptkiddies of performing DOS attacks - or worse they call it hacking a server with a DOS attack?

    I mean it takes some cunningness to 0wn a couple of hundred machines with a simple dail-up aol account..

    Some companies hire blackhat people to DOS their competitors once in a while, think of mail-servers. Other groups DOS certain sites because of their ethical/political/religious backgrounds. So now all of a sudden every "malicious" computer user is a scriptkiddie?

    The only scriptkiddies in these stories are the journalists that form their conclusions according to a certain script that's allways used when it's a story about something "evil" with computers.

    Don't be a scriptkiddie yourself by making these hollow statements

    1. Re:Why always blame the scriptkiddies? by Soko · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why does everyone allways accuse the scriptkiddies of performing DOS attacks - or worse they call it hacking a server with a DOS attack?

      I mean it takes some cunningness to 0wn a couple of hundred machines with a simple dail-up aol account..


      Some one needs to brush up on thier definitions:

      Script Kiddie n. (skript kiddee): A person who uses software tools written by someone else to exploit known security exploits in operating systems and/or server software. A person who poses as being knowlegeable about computers and how these exploits affect said computers. See JeffK.

      And cunningness? To use Goolge? Come on. 3 pages into that search and I'd be in fear of my NT machines, were they not patched and behind an industrial strength firewall.

      Some companies hire blackhat people to DOS their competitors once in a while, think of mail-servers. Other groups DOS certain sites because of their ethical/political/religious backgrounds.

      So you want me to think that groups like these morons are capable of formulating a root exploit in order to DOS thier enemies? Right.I don't know of anyone who has half a brain that would help them do such a thing. Ergo, if they've zombied servers for DOS attacks, they're 5kr1p7 k1dd13z.

      So now all of a sudden every "malicious" computer user is a scriptkiddie?

      Not all, but most are. There are a few Black Hats out there who can pick apart any system they choose with tools of thier own creation. Those are the people who can strike terror into a network admin's heart - they find things that aren't known security holes, and are therefore almost impossible to stop.

      The only scriptkiddies in these stories are the journalists that form their conclusions according to a certain script that's allways used when it's a story about something "evil" with computers.


      See the definition above.

      Geez, you're defensive. Wonder why....

      Soko

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
  21. Hmm.. by Peridriga · · Score: 3, Funny

    CNN is now wondering why...
    After publishing a story on DOS attacks it is receiving a DOS attack on the story about DOS attacks...

  22. EGRESS FILTERS are STILL not implemented by ISPs by Medievalist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    /.
    Best Current Practice recommends egress filtering for all networks. Are yours in place?

    The big problem with DOS and DDOS is the untraceability provided by networks who do not prevent address spoofing with egress filters. If traffic is traceable, criminals get caught.

    Before anyone's knee jerks, let me point out:

    1) this is not a performance issue. Routing hardware and software (LRP for example) is widely and cheaply (compared to line costs) available that can implement egress filtering without any noticeable effect on line speed. Face it, processors are faster than telecommunications.

    2) Egress filters do not improve a repressive regime's ability to finger political dissidents.

    3) Egress filters are unlikely to impact privacy - unless what you are trying to keep private is destructive activity. Post a real example if you disagree.

    4) I know it's not a cure-all. It's a necessary first step, though.

    While Congress milks the entertainment industry for campaign funds in exchange for "digital rights management" facism, they ought to be mandating specific monetary penalties for businesses that do not implement egress filters, and for ISPs that do nothing about hundreds of Code-Red infected nodes on their cable farms. I shouldn't have to pay Comcast if my bandwidth is being principally used by criminals to fill my firewall logs.

    I post this every time the subject comes up; next time I'll just make a flippin' link to the BCP RFCs. I'm sure you'll all be relieved.

    --Charlie

  23. Need power to get ISP's to cooperate by PhotoGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of the biggest problems in DOS attacks, is that you just can't get the attention of major ISP's or backbones to trace and solve the problem.

    We had major DOS attacks on our site for ages. But when the customer of a major national ISP is the source of it, try getting ahold of someone at that company to track the problem. They just won't respond to these things, in our experience.

    I think that for any company to provide internet service, they should be *required* by law, to cooperate in tracking and stopping DOS attacks from their customers. There needs to be a consistent, predictable, and workable national policy for this.

    If someone calls me with threatening phone calls, I *know* it's possible to get the phone company to cooperate, track, and isolate the problem, even if it originates with another phone company. The same should be true with ISP's.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  24. ./configure make ping MS by simetra · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was thinking.... if the make scripts for various stuffs included a ping... Say for example ping that Linux counter project at the end of each Linux install... perhaps they would have a more accurate representation of the number of installs, IPs, etc. You could also through in a ping or sendmail to Microsoft telling them you've found the way out!
    Just a thought....

    --

    "Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
  25. DoS as self-defense against "bad guys" by DocSnyder · · Score: 5, Interesting
    it doesn't gain the attacker anything (unlike rooting a box)

    Sometimes DoS can be a not-really-fine but very effective method of self-defense. In Germany we have a quite big problem with spam advertising dialers - little programs which redirect a w1nd0z3 box's internet dialup connection to an extremely expensive special number which is normally used for phone sex or premium services. One short connection can cost up to 900 € (that's no joke, there's no limit), and as some dialers hide well while replacing the default connection, some people got a phone bill of more than 10000 € at the end of the month.

    During the second halfth of March, I got about five of these dialer spams each day. Other people got even more. The web hoster - a company selling these dialers - didn't act against any incidence of spam, the download accounts remained open for weeks regardless of any complaints. Their uplink... well, UUnet. As the discussion on the Usenet forum "de.admin.net-abuse.mail" went on, even the web hoster's boss himself joined and couldn't understand to be responsible for knowingly tolerating his customers abusing his service - of course he made a lot of money even by spamvertised dialers.

    About a week ago, some spam victims were completely fed up. As the legal methods didn't work at all, the dialer should be made unavailable by distributed mass-downloading. The threat escalated in a clear message to the site maintainer - either go against your spamming customers or see your dialer being downloaded until the server blows the whistle.

    The story appeared on Heise News which has a quite large reader base in Germany, to be read by lots of angry people whose inboxes were full of dialer spam. The "Heise effect" was enough for the site maintainer to become really scared - lots of DSL and broadband users started to download the dialer not only once but as often as they could. The web server became too busy to serve dialers even to people who would want it. The company selling these dialers didn't have any choice - either stop supporting spammers or have their dialer server slashdotted until it blows the whistle. Only a day later the company's boss agreed on getting rid of and seeking legal action against spamming customers.

    A few days later, another spam went around, advertising a dialer hosted on an Eastern-European web server. Same game: the spam victims squeezed the dialer out of the web server as many times as possible. The site got hosed so badly that even a few hours after the spam incident, the dialer was no longer available.

    As a result, if you really want to hit a spammer, DoS^H^H^H/.ing his web site - especially large files or CGI scripts - has finally proved as much more effective than blacklisting, LARTing or anything else (which still remains useful, though). Even big providers will notice a gigabyte-large traffic peak towards only one target.

    1. Re:DoS as self-defense against "bad guys" by arivanov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What you are describing is not DOS. This is pushing "fair" use to its "fair" limits. Yes. I can use all of my spare DSL bandwidth to screw someone over. Actually with QoS deployed on my gateway Linux or BSD box I would not even notice it.

      And it sounds like a jolly good idea. Methinks I need to write a HowTo so people who are not that profficient in Linux/BSD admin can do it. Let's face it the relevant parts of Linux and BSD docs are nightmarish and they are not end-user material.

      Brgds,

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  26. Unintentionals are still a problem by billstewart · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Unintentional attacks do happen - that article on Slashdot pointing to www.myserver.org instead of www.myserver.com, or some TV commercial giving out your 888 number instead of the correct 877 number or whatever, or having somebody type your phone number into their ginsu-fax-o-matic by accident and having the thing keep calling you. Yes, it wasn't deliberate, but it feels just about the same.

    Some DDOSer once cracked one of my DSL lab machines and was pinging home to his box at MIT - except it wasn't really MIT, he'd gotten the byte order wrong on his IP address somehow and was trying to phone home to Japan.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks