OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector
Nathan Ward
nanog at daork.net
Tue Mar 16 04:01:38 UTC 2010
If only there were other security experts on this list with a proven ability to make this thread even more absurd.
On 16/03/2010, at 4:47 PM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
> Misters,
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> 1) First of all, I am absolutely not related to the Obeseus project. From my point of view, the interesting things were that :
>
> a) This project was unknown.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q="obeseus"+"ddos"&btnG=Search&hl=en&esrch=FT1&sa=2
>
>
> b) This project comes from an ISP.
>
> http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/links.html
>
>
> c) Its code is Open Source.
>
> http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz
>
>
> My conclusion is that I give far more credit to Obeseus than to Arbor Networks. By the way, I am surprised that this post didn't generate more interest given the uninteresting babble that I have been forced to read in the past on the NANOG mailing-list from the so-called "experts".
>
>
> 2) EDoS is a "DDoS 2.0"
>
> DDoS is about malicious traffic.
>
> EDoS is malicious traffic engineered to look like legitimate one.
>
> However, the goal is the same : "to obliterate the service infrastructure", to quote Mister Morrow.
>
>
>
> 3) I do my homeworks something that doesn't seem to be the case for a lot of people on this mailing-list.
>
> a) I would want to highlight the post of Tom Sands, Chief Network Engineer, Rackspace Hosting entitled "DDoS mitigation recommendations" [1].
>
> -It seems evidence that he tried the Arbor solution so the three "Arbor++" mails don't make sense.
>
> -About the fourth one :
>
> "Sorry but RTFM
>
> http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/thread.html#16675
>
> Best regards"
>
> Hey kid, Tom Sands subscribed nearly a decade ago on the NANOG mailing-list. When you went out of school, he was already dealing with DoS concerns :
>
> http://www.mcabee.org/lists/nanog/Jan-02/msg00177.html
>
>
>
> b) I am really asking myself how much credit I could give to a spam expert, Suresh Ramasubramanian, about a DDoS related post [2].
>
>
> c) Mister Morrow, even if you are a Network Security engineer at Google [3] (morrowc at google.com) :
>
> -You didn't provide any useful feedback on Obeseus.
>
> -You totally missed the point on my other mails.
>
> This is definitely disappointing.
>
>
> Is this mailing-list a joke ?
>
> Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Guillaume FORTAINE
>
> [1] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/016675.html
> [2] http://www.hserus.net/
> [3] http://www.linkedin.com/in/morrowc
>
>
>
> On 03/16/2010 03:11 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>> I got your point. What I was saying is that what he calls EDoS (and
>> I'm sure he'll say obliterating infrastructure is the ultimate form of
>> an economic dos) is just what goes on ...
>>
>> You may or may not be able to overload the AWS infrastructure by too
>> many queries but you sure as hell will blow the application out if
>> that ddos isnt filtered .. edos again.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Christopher Morrow
>> <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> eh.. I guess I'm splitting hairs. the goal of 100k bots sending 1
>>> query per second to a service that you know can only sustain 50k
>>> queries/second is.. not to economically Dos someone, it's to
>>> obliterate their service infrastructure.
>>>
>>> Sure, you could ALSO target something hosted (for instance) at
>>> Amazon-AWS and increase costs by making lots and lots and lots of
>>> queries, but that wasn't the point of what Deepak wrote, nor what i
>>> corrected.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> !DSPAM:22,4b9effc213882481555555!
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list