Global Network Attacks Were Up Over 98% this morning

What this one-off look does not tell me - are the attacks higher on new areas not used to attacks, or are the highlighted areas used to a significant level of attacks and might therefore have defences?<p>And 98% of what?<p>At a glance and with no real history or numbers this would seem meaningless.

Is this a rare occurrence? 198% of &quot;very little&quot; is still very little.<p>I would&#x27;ve thought the figure often fluctuates by much more than this.

Oops, all I get at that site on my iPad is a message ordering me to install Flash. Hello, Akmai? Anyone noticed the declining support for that old technology ?

The chaps that keep the CloudFlare global network running do seem a bit busy than usual today. I asked if there were &quot;more attacks than usual&quot; and they replied &quot;Yes&quot; and rushed off to do something.

Very low amount of news in this article, doesn&#x27;t mention the attack being used. I feel I needed to assume its a DDoS. But then several types of DDoS don&#x27;t require large amounts of network traffic (and traffic volumes would be the easiest way to see DDoS from the outside looking in) some DDoS&#x27;s can keep a server down with 10-100 packets per second.<p>Basically I learned nothing, and I want this article to have a &quot;Want to know more?&quot; button.

Software on my deciated server already blocked attacks from IP&#x27;s belonging to:<p>- China<p>- Mongolia<p>- Netherlands<p>- Turkey<p>- Iran<p>- Moldova<p>- Romania<p>- Kazakhstan<p>- France<p>- Taiwan<p>- UK<p>Pretty diversified attack in progress.

Lately i noticed a number of cloudfare outages in popular websites, does this relate or is it just because the cloudfare network had some technical glitches?

Is it typical that Texas would be such a large percentage of global attacks? It&#x27;s at 24.83% at the moment.