Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Security Experts Doubt SCO's Claims of DoS

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the raising-a-lot-of-eyebrows dept.

devilkin writes "As a recent Slashdot story indicates, SCO claims their website was the target of a DoS (Denial of Service) attack. Was it really? The people at Groklaw think otherwise..."

17 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It wouldn't be an over-exaggeration to say that a bulk of SCO-related talks happen here on Slashdot. Even NY Times and other mainstream media frequently refer to Slashdot, when they need a quote from "open-source community", "Linux users" and other group that is mentioned in the article. Thus any DDOS attack organization wouldn't probably go unnoticed on this site.

    So here's a question - have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack? If the overwhelming answer on Slashdot is no, then I guess we know the value of SCO's claims.

    1. Re:Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by lactose_incarnate · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, I've been illegally attacking servers. Heh, who is going to answer that question?

    2. Re:Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack?

      Well I tried to view their website after this was mentioned on Slashdot. Does that count?

      Disclaimer : many of the others participating in the Slashdotting are not my friends

    3. Re:Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by pyros · · Score: 5, Funny

      have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack? If the overwhelming answer on Slashdot is no, then I guess we know the value of SCO's claims.


      That's specious logic.


      A single machine on cable or DSL can SYN flood a machine. The attacker sends a stream of SYN packets with forged source addresses, the victim machine replies back to the bogus IP and waits.. and waits.. and waits.. It takes negligible bandwidth to do this.



      I'm intrigued by your ideas, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

    4. Re:Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by Boing · · Score: 5, Funny
      So here's a question - have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack?

      Nice try, Darl.

    5. Re:Let's do a Slashdot insta-poll by geoffspear · · Score: 5, Funny
      Sure, it may seem simple to you, but if you were running a business you'd probably think it made sense to sell a product instead of spending millions of dollars on flimsy lawsuits against corporations with virtually limitless resources to throw at legal defense and countersuits.

      Anyway, my point was that it's not fair to assume they're lying just because a smart person could circumvent the attack. It's equally probable that they're stupid and telling the truth.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  2. Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO will sue Groklaw for illegal use of the term "DDoS", which of course SCO lays claim to.

    1. Re:Soon... by KilobyteKnight · · Score: 5, Funny

      SCO will sue Groklaw for illegal use of the term "DDoS", which of course SCO lays claim to.

      Clearly, the letters "D", "o", and "S" are part of SCO IP.

      "S" is the first letter in their company name. "D", being the letter after "C" is obviously a derivitave work of the second letter. "o" is simply an attempt to hide the misuse of the third letter "O".

      Unquestionably, SCO owns DDoS.

      --
      When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
    2. Re:Soon... by mgg4 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Clearly, the letters "D", "o", and "S" are part of SCO IP.

      Actually, I thought the letters were "P", "o", and "S".

      --
      -- This space for rent.
  3. DDOS..... by Vengie · · Score: 5, Funny
    Blake Stowell was quoted as saying, "From preliminary research, we appear to be under some form of 'Slashdot Effect' -- involving both duplicate stories and annoying links."
    --
    When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
  4. slashdotted already. by RobertTaylor · · Score: 5, Funny

    "SCO claims their website was the target of a DoS (Denial of Service) attack. Was it really?"

    Groklaw certainly has just been ;)

    Cheers,
    rob.

  5. What really happened by Virtex · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO's web site was only designed to handle one person at a time. Until recently, it worked well enough, but recently two people tried to access the web site simultaneoulsy. This, of course, brought down their server. And since the two people were located at different locations, it was distributed; hence, we have a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack.

    And now you know the real story.

    --
    For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
  6. Re:Press release? by Blahbbs · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO probably submitted this story to Slashdot in order to DDoS GrokLaw's web site.... It's working, isn't it?

  7. Re:SYN attacks are not bandwidth hogs by mrpuffypants · · Score: 5, Funny

    who in their right mind merges the public internet server and internal intranet server ???

    who in their right mind sues IBM???

  8. Step 1 by gspeare · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sure this is just an overture to...

    Step 2: "Hackers" infiltrate SCO and maliciously make off with all of the supporting evidence for their suits against IBM. Sorry judge!

  9. Re:Very strange is this; reported BEFORE it happen by ianc7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Later SCO will claim that this is the same server that held the only copy of their moutain of evidence and all of their source code too.

  10. It wasn't a DDOS by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

    It was all their remaining technical people sending out floods of job applications.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.