The Attack That Almost Broke the Internet

[Finlam]

An interesting article on a recent attack that does a good job breaking down the more technical parts.

While we don't have direct visibility into the traffic loads they saw, we have been told by one major Tier 1 provider that they saw more than 300Gbps of attack traffic related to this attack. That would make this attack one of the largest ever reported.

The challenge with attacks at this scale is they risk overwhelming the systems that link together the Internet itself. The largest routers that you can buy have, at most, 100Gbps ports. It is possible to bond more than one of these ports together to create capacity that is greater than 100Gbps however, at some point, there are limits to how much these routers can handle. If that limit is exceeded then the network becomes congested and slows down.

Over the last few days, as these attacks have increased, we've seen congestion across several major Tier 1s, primarily in Europe where most of the attacks were concentrated, that would have affected hundreds of millions of people even as they surfed sites unrelated to Spamhaus or CloudFlare. If the Internet felt a bit more sluggish for you over the last few days in Europe, this may be part of the reason why.
Source: Cloudflare blog (http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet)

Now that's a real DDOS...Nicely defended.

[Traab]

Thats actually a scary thought. Not just crashing a site, or even a handful of sites, but crashing a portion of the internet itself?

[Amidus Drexel]

The most efficient way to take down the internet would be to destroy sections of the undersea cables in the Atlantic. You wouldn't get all of the internet, but you'd shut it down pretty fast, and it'd be a long time before they got it back up again.

[Lord Raziere]

The most efficient way to take down the internet would be to destroy sections of the undersea cables in the Atlantic. You wouldn't get all of the internet, but you'd shut it down pretty fast, and it'd be a long time before they got it back up again.

wait.

let me get this straight.

you said this.

while on the internet.

where anyone can read this.

presumably being intelligent enough to identify this glaring flaw.

yet, not having the prudence of mind, to keep this to yourself so that people who would want to destroy the internet, don't get ideas?

:smallconfused:

[AddZable]

I believe the term he is feeling right now would be known as "IDGAF" and "Problem, bro?"

Yep.

[Amidus Drexel]

I think I'm relatively safe in assuming that anyone seriously trying to shut down the internet has done far more research on this than I have. (reading an article once). :smallwink:

It's fairly expensive to get to the ocean floor (via submarine), and the communications cables are durable enough that just bumping into them with a sub won't do much anyway. (dropping an anchor on them might; hooking them with an anchor and pulling it up probably would, but there we get into time-consuming and/or expensive). Also, the Atlantic is big. Just knowing where to look would be a ridiculous amount of work.

[Telonius]

wait.

let me get this straight.

you said this.

while on the internet.

where anyone can read this.

presumably being intelligent enough to identify this glaring flaw.

yet, not having the prudence of mind, to keep this to yourself so that people who would want to destroy the internet, don't get ideas?

:smallconfused:

It's a fairly well-known (http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet) vulnerability.

[Mauve Shirt]

But of course everyone knows the most probable method of attack, which I will not describe here.

[Weezer]

But of course everyone knows the most probable method of attack, which I will not describe here.

Determining the flaw is a trivial matter, progressing in the usual manner, and is left as an exercise for the reader.

I hate when textbooks do that

[lobablob]

Apparently this isn't entirely true: http://gizmodo.com/5992652/that-internet-war-apocalypse-is-a-lie

Short version is that author claims that the information about the attack all comes from an internet security firm who helped deal with the attack and that when he contacted various organisations that monitor the stability of the internet, they told him that they had no data to substantiate the claim that the attacks had an impact on anything beyond the websites they targeted.

[cucchulainnn]

cutting an actual cable has recently been tired. luckily it was stopped.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21963100

things of this nature will only become more common. the future is now. cyber war will only grow in magnitude.

[Amidus Drexel]

It's a fairly well-known (http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet) vulnerability.

Well, it looks like someone has done all the hard work of finding the information for us. :smallamused:


cutting an actual cable has recently been tired. luckily it was stopped.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21963100

things of this nature will only become more common. the future is now. cyber war will only grow in magnitude.

Huh. Interesting.

Well, yeah. That goes for just about everything of that nature, though; as the internet gets to be bigger and more important, it becomes a better target. It's not quite nearly as extreme as you're making it out to be, though.

[Douglas]

Well, it looks like someone has done all the hard work of finding the information for us. :smallamused:
And the results show just how hard it would be to actually carry out such an operation. I imagine the U.S. military could do it if the whole organization decided it was necessary. Some other major national governments might also have the required manpower and firepower. I doubt anyone else is capable of pulling it off, especially with the U.S. military actively working to protect it (I think the U.S. has a standing policy that an attack on the Internet as a whole will be treated as a declaration of war, or something like that).

[Grinner]

But of course everyone knows the most probable method of attack, which I will not describe here.

Orbital bombardment? Nuclear warfare? Strategically-placed EMPs?

[The Glyphstone]

Orbital bombardment? Nuclear warfare? Strategically-placed EMPs?

Banning cats and porn?

[zegram 33]

Banning cats and porn?

and now i know why your sig proclaims you as evil

:eek:

[Anarion]

I was in Japan when one of the undersea cables got messed up. It was out for a couple days. The economy did not collapse and banking and finance had everything backed up. We couldn't do much other than check email for the time it was out, but they fixed the whole thing in about 3 days, and could have fixed more cables in that same amount of time, if they had needed to.


Banning cats and porn?

This would either be the worst thing or the best thing. Not sure which.

[Lord Raziere]

It's a fairly well-known (http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet) vulnerability.

……I'm just gonna….facepalm kay?

I know anyone who would want to destroy the internet would probably research it more and its probably very hard to do and such but…

I still think its….kinda…..not wise to do so, ok? its just not a wise thing to talk openly of in my opinion. ok? I know, I'm probably worried over nothing…I just don't think it is wise, all I'm saying.

[Anarion]

……I'm just gonna….facepalm kay?

I know anyone who would want to destroy the internet would probably research it more and its probably very hard to do and such but…

I still think its….kinda…..not wise to do so, ok? its just not a wise thing to talk openly of in my opinion. ok? I know, I'm probably worried over nothing…I just don't think it is wise, all I'm saying.

I wouldn't worry too much. There are a lot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design) of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax) things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_gas) that are pretty well known at this point that could be problematic. It's generally an issue of resources, manpower, time, and the fact that if you start looking into anything too problematic, people will notice.

[Traab]

Banning cats and porn?

If you removed cats and porn the internet who totally collapse. It would be like removing all cement and metal from a skyscraper. Whatever is left would just cave in on itself.

[TuggyNE]

Orbital bombardment? Nuclear warfare? Strategically-placed EMPs?

Well, the ARPAnet was originally designed expressly to be stable in the face of widespread Soviet nuclear attacks and deliberate state-sponsored sabotage, so I'm inclined to think not so much.

[Asta Kask]

Remember that this is a statement from a company that makes its living defending from this kind of attack. It's in their own interest to talk it up.

[TheFallenOne]

wait.

let me get this straight.

you said this.

while on the internet.

where anyone can read this.

presumably being intelligent enough to identify this glaring flaw.

yet, not having the prudence of mind, to keep this to yourself so that people who would want to destroy the internet, don't get ideas?

:smallconfused:


……I'm just gonna….facepalm kay?

I know anyone who would want to destroy the internet would probably research it more and its probably very hard to do and such but…

I still think its….kinda…..not wise to do so, ok? its just not a wise thing to talk openly of in my opinion. ok? I know, I'm probably worried over nothing…I just don't think it is wise, all I'm saying.

-1 Internet.
It's a shame these counters only allow adding, not subtracting. You failed pretty hard here.

It's your right to have this degree of paranoia, but I recommend against it. You might as well consider it unwise to make murder mysteries, after all they could give people ideas how best to kill someone. Agatha Christie you fiend...

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Raziere
I still think its….kinda…..not wise to do so, ok? its just not a wise thing to talk openly of in my opinion. ok? I know, I'm probably worried over nothing…I just don't think it is wise, all I'm saying.

The people who would like to do this probably aren't reading the banter on a gaming forum.

:smallamused:

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

The people who would like to do this probably aren't reading the banter on a gaming forum.

:smallamused:

No, we definitely are.

[Karoht]

The people who would like to do this probably aren't reading the banter on a gaming forum.

:smallamused:
Wait! There's a gaming forum here?
I thought that was just a cover for all the secret code we were passing back and forth for ploting global domination/destruction?


@Lord Raziere
I respect your fear and will not belittle it. The above should not be interpreted as a knock at you in any way.
But believe me when I say that there are forums (as in other websites which I won't name and won't contribute to their bandwidth) which discuss these sorts of things in far greater detail, to the point where I'm actually uncertain if the people on those forums will one day be a threat to my well being.
A lot of people talk a big talk, but are unlikely to undergo the difficulties in performing the action.

And really, it's just the internet. Porn and cats down for a few days? Meh.
KY jelly and condom sales might spike, as might antidepressants and/or booze.

[Thajocoth]

The most effective method of destroying the internet is to push the Earth towards a black hole. Anything less is temporary, at best.

[Karoht]

The most effective method of destroying the internet is to push the Earth towards a black hole. Anything less is temporary, at best.Or the sun.
What? It's a suggestion.

[Bouregard]

Killing the internet? Easy, just disable google.

The data is still there but 99% of the users will be unable to find what they are looking for.

Large companies can't do business with most of their customers gone and will discontinue the service they provide.

In the 21th century only a few people still know what an adress bar is. Trust me on that, I work in customer service for a financial service provider, you can spent up to half an hour playing the "Let's find the adress bar in the thing called browser"-game.

[Archonic Energy]

It's a fairly well-known (http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet) vulnerability.

Archon's thoughts while reading that article.

"oh, Hey... I monitor that cable...

oh... I work there... and have access there... intresting!"

[Whoracle]

[...]In the 21th century only a few people still know what an adress bar is. Trust me on that, I work in customer service for a financial service provider, you can spent up to half an hour playing the "Let's find the adress bar in the thing called browser"-game.

You preach it, brother!

That being said, yeah, it was quite a PR spin that cloudflare gave with that article. The decentralized nature of the internet makes it pretty stable, and the defense technique cloudfare used was, in effect, actually more of an "attack" on the internet than the original attack. If they hadn't defended themselves, what would have happened? Cloudflare customier's websites'd have been down. Period. Last time I checked, they weren't "the internet". And even if one were to disable google and facebook or even the whole WWW, the internet would go on. It's quite a bit more than just websites. Cut the cables, crash the root DNS nodes (which they'll happily do on their own. Two times that I heard of during the last year alone...), that'll threaten the net, but no measly DDoS ever will.

[SiuiS]

Banning cats and porn?

As soon as we get control over forces of nature, I would like to think we would finally get flying cars instead of moralizing the Internet.


I was in Japan when one of the undersea cables got messed up. It was out for a couple days. The economy did not collapse and banking and finance had everything backed up. We couldn't do much other than check email for the time it was out, but they fixed the whole thing in about 3 days, and could have fixed more cables in that same amount of time, if they had needed to.

Man, I know you're all like "the human race existed before they Internet, they'll do fine" but come on, be serious. We all know Japan has like, seven humans and the rest are cyborgs who operate via wifi Hivemind. It's safe here, you don't need to spin the propaganda.

And banks? Psh. Like someone who works with numbers would learn math, that's ridiculous.


Remember that this is a statement from a company that makes its living defending from this kind of attack. It's in their own interest to talk it up.

capitalism prompting posturing? Why, whatever do you mean, friend? :smalltongue:

[Karoht]

Archon's thoughts while reading that article.

"oh, Hey... I monitor that cable...

oh... I work there... and have access there... intresting!"
Hold the internet hostage.
Demand ALL the Things!

And if anyone tries to stop you, do this:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/05/11

[Douglas]

You preach it, brother!

That being said, yeah, it was quite a PR spin that cloudflare gave with that article. The decentralized nature of the internet makes it pretty stable, and the defense technique cloudfare used was, in effect, actually more of an "attack" on the internet than the original attack. If they hadn't defended themselves, what would have happened? Cloudflare customier's websites'd have been down. Period. Last time I checked, they weren't "the internet". And even if one were to disable google and facebook or even the whole WWW, the internet would go on. It's quite a bit more than just websites. Cut the cables, crash the root DNS nodes (which they'll happily do on their own. Two times that I heard of during the last year alone...), that'll threaten the net, but no measly DDoS ever will.
As I understand it, their defense technique makes it so that taking down any one of their web sites requires taking down their entire network. That's all. It does not, I think, change the difficulty of taking down their network or cause doing so to have any greater effect on the rest of the Internet.

If someone's goal is to take down Cloudflare, this defense technique makes no difference. If someone's goal is to take down one site, this technique forces them to upgrade that goal to taking down Cloudflare. The damage is still being done by the attacker; the only way the defense might be amplifying it is indirectly by inspiring the attacker to greater efforts.