TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

KrebsOnSecurity is now up and hosted on Google Cloud

240 pointsby Usuover 8 years ago

10 comments

pooooglesover 8 years ago
I&#x27;ve always wondered how Google would deal with a client on GCP being DDoSed. Mainly as were in online advertising and DDoS extortion isn&#x27;t uncommon.<p>Guess with this I&#x27;ll now find out, as crapping on Krebs&#x27; site is practically a right of passage when you&#x27;ve got a botnet now.
评论 #12574595 未加载
评论 #12575255 未加载
评论 #12575543 未加载
评论 #12574782 未加载
评论 #12574795 未加载
评论 #12575042 未加载
评论 #12574551 未加载
PuffinBlueover 8 years ago
I&#x27;ve always wondered just how much a network run by someone like Google or Facebook or one of the other absolute top tier providers like AWS or Azure might be able to &#x27;handle&#x27; in terms of dealing with DDoS attacks.<p>Presumably these giants can easily handle such traffic as long as someone is willing to pay for the privilege? 665gbps seems tiny in comparison to the capacity someone like Google might have at its disposal but I&#x27;m speculating as I haven&#x27;t seen anything detailing their network stats.<p>To give something of a concluding statement to this waffle I guess I have respect for Google in running this public service type protection for sites that have a strong enough &#x27;public good&#x27; element.
评论 #12575289 未加载
评论 #12575174 未加载
评论 #12574845 未加载
mtgxover 8 years ago
If the 665 Gbps botnet was indeed powered by mainly IoT devices, then this is only the very beginning. We&#x27;re about to see multi-Tbps botnets soon, all because most IoT companies could care less about security, and because most of them want to connect every IoT device to the Internet <i>by default</i> (rather than through a gateway, which at least could limit infections).
评论 #12574877 未加载
评论 #12574612 未加载
评论 #12577902 未加载
alpbover 8 years ago
Can somebody please enlighten me, why is this vague post on the front page with no comments and 8 upvotes?
评论 #12574542 未加载
评论 #12574538 未加载
评论 #12574543 未加载
评论 #12574533 未加载
tim333over 8 years ago
&gt;KrebsOnSecurity is now up...<p>It isn&#x27;t for me. I get &quot;This site can’t be reached - krebsonsecurity.com refused to connect.&quot;
评论 #12575021 未加载
评论 #12574578 未加载
评论 #12574613 未加载
tux1968over 8 years ago
Now that he has quickly found another safe harbor, this attack may well have a sort of Streisand effect and give Brian Krebs more prominence than he already had. Would be nice to see something good come out of this and maybe even cause future attacks to be seen as counterproductive by potential perpetrators.
user5994461over 8 years ago
The solution I&#x27;d like to see:<p>1) Put the site behind CloudFlare.<p>2) Wait for an attack...<p>3) Force all users to go through a capcha before accessing the site.<p>Note: The capcha setting can be enabled with 3 clicks in cloudflare UI and it takes 2-5 minutes to propagate. (Yes, I speak from experience)
评论 #12577569 未加载
mxpxrocks10over 8 years ago
seems to be down again at 6:06AM PST<p>sometimes you can get the HTML to load from :80 but the CSS breaks. HTTPS doesn&#x27;t seem to work at all.
imaginenoreover 8 years ago
How would that solve anything? He would have to pay crazy Google CDN fees now:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cloud.google.com&#x2F;cdn&#x2F;pricing" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cloud.google.com&#x2F;cdn&#x2F;pricing</a><p>At 650 Gbps (81.25 GB&#x2F;s) he&#x27;s looking at $1.625&#x2F;sec ($5850&#x2F;hr) in cache egress fees alone.<p>I would go CloudFlare, which is flat rate.
评论 #12575079 未加载
评论 #12575240 未加载
评论 #12575057 未加载
mkopinskyover 8 years ago
Unfortunately I can&#x27;t get to the new site (without changing my DNS servers) because Verizon is resolving krebsonsecurity.com to loopback. Presumably doing it for (poor) DDOS mitigation, but this sort of censorship is ridiculous.<p><pre><code> $ nslookup krebsonsecurity.com 71.242.0.12 Server: 71.242.0.12 Address: 71.242.0.12#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: krebsonsecurity.com Address: 127.0.0.1 </code></pre> EDIT: I see downthread that this is a DNS propagation issue. Nevermind.
评论 #12575474 未加载
评论 #12575475 未加载