Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday January 29 2022, @12:55PM   Printer-friendly

Microsoft Azure customer hit by largest 3.47 Tbps DDoS attack:

A Microsoft Azure cloud computing customer in Asia was a victim of a massive 3.47 Tbps DDoS attack (distributed denial of service attack) in November 2021, the software and technology giant Microsoft revealed on January 25, 2022.

The DDoS attack lasted approximately 15 minutes and included a botnet of more than 10,000 compromised IoT (Internet of Things) devices from countries across the globe. These included Iran, India, China, Russia, Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea, and the United States.

Attack vectors were UDP reflection on port 80 using Simple Service Discovery Protocol (SSDP), Connection-less Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (CLDAP), Domain Name System (DNS), and Network Time Protocol (NTP) comprising one single peak.

Alethea Toh Product Manager, Azure Networking

Microsoft's report further disclosed that there has been a surge in DDoS attacks with the United States and India being prime targets. The company noted that Hong Kong has also become a popular hotspot for attackers however there has been a decrease in DDoS activity in Europe.

[...] A DDoS attack involves sending a huge amount of illegal traffic from compromised machines to the intended target and therefore disrupting them completely. The system can crash and lead to a massive loss of data, particularly, in the case of companies that host a significant amount of information regarding their clients and customers.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday January 29 2022, @10:32PM

    by VLM (445) on Saturday January 29 2022, @10:32PM (#1216800)

    There is no such thing. If sending a lot of packets is illegal

    Its a "English language is shitty" problem not a legal problem. Or its illegal as in violating a protocol specs not illegal as in jaywalking or smoking a joint.

    So this example isn't a UDP reflection attack, but the spirit of the attack is imagine I sent a packet to soylent news requesting the web page at sn.org/siaflnfbvawtfwtfwtfsdfasdhsgdfg.html and imagine SN is one of those places with the cute animated 404 error message page that takes up 50 megs of bandwidth because their 404 page has dancing animated toasters on it, and I falsify my source address as actually being you, and the SN server responds back to you (not me) with a 50 meg 404 error message page. For laughs I tried a URL at SN and its a modestly large 404 page; but you can't do UDP reflection attacks on TCP port 80 anyway.

    The actual way you do a reflection attack using NTP is you send a packet to "some" ntp servers that (in a speculative sense) I'm using an authentication algo that's literally not even defined in the spec and their server flips their shit upon seeing such a weird authentication spec and sends an enormous 1000 byte response back along the lines of "WTF that auth protocol doesn't exist dumbass go away" although in computer language not English, and for the LOLz I put your address in as the source instead of my actual address.

    So (making this up for the Lolz, but in spirit I'm correct) my packet is illegal as in the ntp protocol specification says legal ntp packets all have one of the defined authentication schemes identified by a number 0 to 35 currently defined as of 2022 but I sent one identified with the number 36 manually set to some poor bastard, and their server flipped out and spammed you back an enormous error message because auth scheme #36 doesn't exist as of 2022. And my ntp ping was like 20 bytes and their error message was 2000 bytes so I amplified my attack on you by a factor of 100 by sending "illegal" packets to an innocent bystander.

    If you think about it using a shitty soylent news automobile analogy, its like doing a DDOS on your postal mailbox by sending a shitton of fake screwed up magazine subscriptions to Car and Driver magazine and totally Fing up the subscription request except for including your postal address, so Car and Driver keeps sending you endless form letters along the lines of "OK dude, you should know that legal credit card numbers are not negative integers nor floats so please try to re-subscribe". So they're illegal in the sense of the credit card spec says legal credit card numbers are 16 digits or whatever, not negative forty two and a half or some nonsense like that.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2