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