If yes, how long does it normally take to get them? If At all? Weeks? Months? Years?
These days DDoS seems far too easy, far too common.
On another side, as bliker mentioned, those are usually kids. Replying to them that you have submitted an official IC3 report usually stops them, and some were even asking to cancel the report.
 - https://www.ic3.gov/complaint/default.aspx
> The shocking thing about these DDoS-for-hire services is that — as I’ve reported in several previous stories — a majority of them are run by young kids who apparently can think of no better way to prove how cool and “leet” they are than by wantonly knocking Web sites offline and by launching hugely disruptive assaults. Case in point: My site appears to have been attacked this week by a 15-year-old boy from Illinois who calls himself “Mr. Booter Master” online.
enabling source filtering in all networks will essentially kill off these UDP amplification attacks, because the attacker wouldn't be able to spoof your address as the source address.
It should be straight forward to implement a protocol that each NTP server won't send data to the same ip more than once every 10 seconds regardless of the number of requests.
If you can arrange with your upstream internet access provider for them to filter out junk before it hits the bottleneck, then great - but that involves cooperating with people, which may take some time.
An open society makes the assumption that people play by the rules and that those that do not will be caught and can be punished. But in reality that assumption does not hold true. Witness the extent to which the Mafia has been able to ruin your country. They've managed to infiltrate the highest echelons of politics, live like kings and in general are so far above the law that it's farcical.
Punishment is for small time criminals. So yes, hackers, burglars, extortionists and so on stand some chance of being caught. But the big fish (in this case, the bosses of the hackers) will likely get away with it while some patsy does time.
I think you're wrong in any event: the more open and well run a society is, the harder it is for mafias to really take root. That's why they are stronger in places like Italy than in, say, Sweden: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Basis_of_a_Backward_S...
And truth be told, there has been progress in the fight against the Mafia, just that it's a long slog, not something that's going to be fixed from one day to the next.
Funny you should mention Sweden, they actually have quite a bit of gang activity and organized crime there. It's not as visible as the Mafia and definitely not as organized but being an 'open society' is definitely perceived as being ripe for the plucking by the not-so-nice elements in our world.
I find it favorable to compare with the other opposite: dictatorships. There you usually have very little small time crime, all the crummy criminals are caught and punished (usually very harshly). But the government is the elephant in the room in those countries, they are the real criminals.
I think that crime is somehow systemic, that it is almost impossible to have an open society without having crime in the populace and as that model shifts towards a more closed society the crime shifts with it until the majority of it is found amongst those that rule.
There simply is an element of society that will try to game any model in such a way that they maximize their pay-off while minimizing their potential exposure to hard work. Parasitic behavior. And being a parasite works, it's a good niche to be in and plenty of people that find the regular roads to riches closed to them for whatever reason figure that they're going to get theirs no matter what.
I'm not sure where the current, ideal, and historical tradeoffs have been for this.
For many many people, computer is just a box for writing stuff in MS Word and watching porn.
Dont use IE
"What is IE? Next time they click on it to get to the Internet"
Can You please stoping using XP?
"Why should I pay for upgrade when everything i do is working perfectly fine?"
Honestly, there are people who dont know Shxt. And they dont want to know about it either. To them even basic computer usage is extremely complex. That is why Tablet, is getting the traction in Grandma and others who dont want anything but a Internet and Application capable Appliance.
Your home electrical?
Your home plumbing? Natural Gas? Lawn care?
The pumps that fuel your car tank?
Not everyone can be an expert in everything. Someone who makes their living perfecting one of those aspects might look at things you do and say "don't do that, you're damaging it" but to you its "who cares? I just need it to work and its been fine up until now!"
Computers/software might be your thing but they're not Grandma's so don't push your agenda on someone just because they might have some ignorance you don't.
Now we're both content to be wizards of our own domains without talking down to each other about it.
If I where interviewing some one for a developer role and they had not at least heard of ohms law or similar basic principals I would probably pass on them.
In the US at least, this is not a crime. If someone leaves their car unlocked by accident, why should they get punished if someone steals it and uses it for a crime?
Victim blaming is not the answer, it's just silly.
Negligence. If you own a powerful tool, you are at least in part responsible for it not to be misused. Similarly to how you are usually required to keep your guns locked away and are held responsible (at least ideally…) if someone steals them from your kitchen table and misuses them, you are held responsible if someone just sits in your car and drives off to kill someone.
> Victim blaming is not the answer, it's just silly.
Except that the victim in a DDoS is the person being ddos’d, not the random user who installed malware. If someone gave you a key and said “Enter this flat over there, take the computer, bring it to me and I’ll give you 10€“, you couldn’t later claim to be a “victim” because they stole your time. If someone sends you a file and goes “double-click this and you’ll get fantastic porn”, I don’t see how you could later claim to be a victim if they stole part of your data cap.
"Double-click this for fantastic porn", on the other hand, will sound perfectly legitimate to many unsuspecting computer users. And there is nothing inherently illegal about the act.
I feel sort of bad that this is what makes me finally self host my RSS reader, since it's totally out of their control, but I've been planning on jumping ship for a while, it's just been low priority for me. Goread has been tempting me though, so I guess I'll check it out.
For me, I stopped and thought about how I access my RSS feeds. I used to be a pure desktop RSS reader, and then I started using both my phone and my desktop, and since Google Reader shut down I've mostly just been using Feedly on my phone. Since I only check my feeds on one device now, I don't need to worry about syncing across platforms, which is the primary purpose of Feedly in my opinion.
If that sounds like you, and you're on Android, check out gReader. While it can integrate with Feedly and a few other services, it can also just act like a "dumb" RSS reader and just download the feed content to your phone instead of relying on a sync service. So far I'm enjoying the experience.
For example, I use it with the feedly theme (https://github.com/levito/tt-rss-feedly-theme) and af_feedmod to get a full text feed for various sites (https://github.com/m42e/ttrss_plugin-af_feedmod).
Miniflux was faster, which I now use for audio/visual content (also appreciated its encouragement to pare down my feed list) but the overall winner in terms of pure day-to-day simple usage is Newsbeuter.
It's a mutt-like RSS reader and it's just an extremely efficient way to keep on top of feed information. And of course it's nice to be able to read feeds over SSH directly.
 - http://miniflux.net/
 - http://newsbeuter.org/
Maybe it has to do with its free-ness, as people worry about them shutting doors like Google Reader, but if you're looking for a free solution then I'd definitely recommend it.
It's too bad, digg reader had a lot of promise.
Now I'm on BazQux, which works very, very well and very, very quickly, but has no mobile version and a design straight out of 1996.
You could look more here
I have put together install instructions here: http://thornelabs.net/2014/05/10/install-fever-rss-reader-on...
- Advanced DDoS protection (layers 3,4 and 7)
- 100% uptime guaranteed
- BGP Origins protection
- Web Application Firewall
Not sure if they integrated CloudFlare now or it was present before.
It's sad that to run a service now the expectation is to shovel money to another service to absorb UDP packets.
So, perhaps more to your liking would be selling armed guard services to guard against a gang robbery, while simultaneously funding and supporting (but not actually participating in, i.e. not actually providing people for) said gang.
This metaphor got long and stupid, but at least its accurate. Stop fear-mongering just because you don't like CloudFlare.
They don't do that, but continue to sell their DDoS protection service (beyond the free tier), so they are indeed a racketeering operation.
In more detail:
- These DDoS-for-hire services being referred to are called "booters," "stressers," or similarly retarded names. For a low fee (I think the average is probably around $10, but you can check yourself), one can buy access to one, where they're able to launch an attack for a period of time (the exact period depends on the booter, and some even charge more for longer attacks; 5-10 minutes at a time is probably around average now) by logging into a website, entering the IP/host, and clicking the "attack" button. That is, no skill. Check places like hackforums yourself and you'll find tons of these. Usually the booters are using Ecatel boxes (generally paid for by the booter owner) because they allow spoofing (which is another topic entirely), some use rooted boxes as well.
- These are very common in gaming, because any 12-year-old with access to mommy's credit card can get their hands on one. That's where the "booter" name comes from; the original meaning was to "boot" someone off Xbox Live (residential connections are obviously really easy to knock out).
- The vast majority of these booters are behind CloudFlare to mask their true host. This serves two purposes: it discourages abuse complaints against the host and also provides the sites with DDoS protection.
- Now, this is like drugs - booter owners don't tend to be friendly with each other. As with rival drug dealers, they'll attack each other and generally try to knock out their competition.
- The only reason these booters are able to operate is because of CloudFlare eliminating the DDoS aspect. If CloudFlare stopped providing service to these illegal sites, they'd be forced to fend for themselves, and it would basically be a "gang war" - everyone attacking each other. Which is fine with me, as if the booter kids are attacking each other, their booters aren't able to mess with anyone else. (Let dumb kids be dumb kids.) Eventually perhaps there will be a small number of booters that come out "on the top," able to withstand attacks, but this then has the effect of eliminating most of the competition, which means the prices will rise. This is also a desired effect, because it's harder to get mommy to agree to pay $100 for something (I'm sure they lie about it) than $10.
- So why not just put your own stuff behind CloudFlare and get rid of the problem? Well, besides the whole issue of not wanting to support this racketeering scam (yes, there is a free level of CloudFlare, but certainly they want to sell you the paid ones and the higher levels can withstand different attacks), this option is only open for websites.
FYI, my position in all this is as a game server owner who has dealt with this BS enough, and I'll admit I'm certainly biased towards that side.
CloudFlare stopping support here would go a long ways towards eliminating the booter problem. It won't eliminate DDoS attacks entirely, of course, but it will eliminate a whole class of them and probably the largest class (because actual botnet owners are rarer). I agree entirely with the assessment that CloudFlare is engaging in racketeering.
Also, I believe their defense is "we are a proxy, not the host, go elsewhere to complain". So, yes- They appear to allow these booters to exist and thrive in a world where they were unable to (at this level) before.
Just because a company temporarily relocates behind Cloudflare doesn't mean CF is guilty, though. They can't vet every website before it goes up and each time it updates.
If they aren't kicking these guys off their network for performing the same activities they defend against, though . . . well, "racket" is kind of the term for it.
In fact, this is precisely what they've done in the past, though they'd only provide the host details rather than stopping service to a site. (I don't think they'll even go this far anymore, rather they'll give you the abuse email for the host and tell you to have the host contact them, which is ridiculous.) I've filed a few such complaints myself. In one instance, the booter site didn't provide any info about its services without registration, so I linked to the hackforums thread where it was being offered. CloudFlare declined this as sufficient proof. Luckily, I could register an account without payment, and that gave me the options to pay to launch attacks, so I sent the login details to CloudFlare and they accepted that.
I wonder, however, if even the latter policy would solve the booter problem. Accessible websites are convenient for commerce, but they aren't required.
Also, any argument you make about CloudFlare could also be made about Google: I see http://quantumbooter.net as the second link and http://top10booters.com/ as the fifth link at https://www.google.com/search?q=booter+services
I agree with this.
> Re-reading your comment, I'm not sure, but are you saying that CF are at the former end of the policy spectrum? That's regrettable.
Somewhat. As of my last experience with them (which was like a year ago), they will accept abuse complaints for booters. If you can prove to them the site is a booter, by providing documentation on the site itself (not hackforums or anywhere else where it's being advertised, which is understandable as it's basically hearsay, though a bit difficult) indicating the site offers a DDoS service, they will provide the abuse@ email of the hosting company. They will tell you to have the abuse@ people contact them directly for further details. This is the only action they will take.
But my opinion is they should, upon confirming the site is a booter, terminate their service to the site. It would also be nice if they would continue to provide the host details, in addition, so the reporter can contact the actual host and have the site taken down from there as well.
> Also, any argument you make about CloudFlare could also be made about Google: I see http://quantumbooter.net as the second link and http://top10booters.com/ as the fifth link at https://www.google.com/search?q=booter+services
Very good point, thank you for mentioning.
The difference I see is that CloudFlare actively provides a service to them, while Google is merely maintaining a keyword-based search listing for them. That being said, I can see both sides of this one.
My views on the legitimacy (rather, lack thereof) of booters: they are a service that serves absolutely no legitimate purpose. The sole purpose is to perform an illegal act against another person. I know a bunch of them are sold on hackforums as "stressers," i.e. "stress test your own server," but that also isn't a legitimate purpose - I can see no case where one would want to stress test their own services with some UDP or SYN flood over the Internet. Such a thing would only be done over a private network using your own packet generator.
Help them thrive, how? I don't understand. Because they prevent DDOS-for-hire services from attacking each other? Surely "other DDOS-for-hire operators" are not the people charged with stopping DDOS-for-hire services.
Depending on your point of view, cloudflare providing the protection that makes DDOS-for-hire possible is either (a) them being fair and website-content-neutral, anything else would be censorship or (b) the glazier giving baseballs to the child who carelessly breaks windows with them, to generate demand for his services that would not otherwise exist.
EDIT Surely many of these DDOS-for-hire companies cross into illegal territory. CF can maintain a content-neutral stance by kicking illegal activity off.
Their position is a reasonable one: they are not the host, they are not responsible for content, don't ask them to censor.
Unless you're claiming the blackmail group is made up of Cloudflare employees, you should choose your words more wisely.
Still, saying they are a racket is a step too far. There were lots of accusations of the antivirus vendors purposefully releasing viruses in the 80s and 90s, which would certainly be a racket if it were true.
 Not counting the products themselves as viruses.
Pretty bold assumption IMO
DDoS wouldn't go away without booters, but many small cases like this would be significantly reduced.
I'd really like to have a desktop-app w/o web service that sync'ed to my phone which I also like to read rss on.
Personally I'm beginning to hate email... sorta wish the actually-important stuff in my email were sent to my RSS reader...
I don't think I'm an RSS power user since I mostly use it for comics (~30), some techblogs and a couple of tumblr feeds.
I'm currently using bazqux since it is fast and has a no-frills interface.
> We are working in parallel with other victims of the same group and with law enforcement.
Last.fm is also experiencing "network difficulties" for a few days now, I'm curious if they are also on the same group.
"2:04am PST – Criminals are attacking feedly with a distributed denial of service attack (DDoS). The attacker is trying to extort us money to make it stop. We refused to give in and are working with our network providers to mitigate the attack as best as we can."