News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Sir_Cmpwn on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:32AM (#14247189)
Idea: let's proxy half the internet through a private, proprietary service! We can get people to give us valid SSL certificates for their sites, too, and let's fuck up Tor while we're at it. We can totally handle it, right? Oh, and we need to pay for it somehow, so let's go the venture capital approach and just pretend we won't eventually hit a growth cap and ruin our company Twitter-style when we get there.

The crazy thing is people actually bought it.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Afforess on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:40AM (#14247263)
I love a good pitchfork and torch session as much as the next rabble-rouser, but let's remember Cloudflare got popular because they _solved*_ a hard problem: how to deal with a DDOS, as a small or medium size website. Cloudflare's essentially a for-profit insurance pool for bandwidth. No individual site has enough bandwidth to handle a DDOS, nor can afford it, but pooled together, many sites can afford a service that can handle individual DDOS attacks. Even if you want to solve the problem without a profit-motive, you still end up with a solution that is going to look very similar to Cloudflare.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by eeeeeeeeeeeee on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:44AM (#14247316)
Exactly. You don't solve a DDoS problem by having less capacity than your attacker and most individual companies can never afford the amount of bandwidth that is at Cloudflare's disposal.

Centralization was absolutely the best answer to that problem and will be for a long time. Almost nobody but fortune 500 companies would be able to survive a DDoS otherwise.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by pyvpx on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:50AM (#14247370)
Akamai has had and continues to have more capacity than Cloudflare.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by snowwrestler on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:01PM (#14247517)
Ok but they:

1) are way more expensive than Cloudflare

2) suck at DDOS mitigation (there's a lot more to it than just bandwidth)

3) don't care much about DDOS mitigation (it is a side business from their actual business, which is edge caching)

4) drop customers who actually get hit with big DDOS attacks (see #3 above--they will always prioritize caching customers over DDOS customers)

EDIT- oh and I forgot to say that if your site is HTTPS, you will have to give Akamai your keys, just like you do with Cloudflare.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by pieter1976 on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:58AM (#14247489)
For CDN, yes. For DDoS mitigation, no. Before they removed the figure from their website they claimed about 1/5th the DDoS mitigation capacity as Cloudflare.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by gtaylor on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:58AM (#14247487)
That doesn't matter at all. They've still got tons of capacity.

> You don't solve a DDoS problem by having less capacity than your attacker and most individual companies can never afford the amount of bandwidth that is at Cloudflare's disposal.

You can have less capacity than Akamai (many excellent providers have less) and still serve this purpose.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by eeeeeeeeeeeee on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @01:06PM (#14248219)
They do, but they are considerably more expensive to the point they aren't even competing with Cloudflare.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by jankedeen on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:59AM (#14247500)
Don't know that they have more but most colos I've used are using akamai.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by jwineman on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:53AM (#14247412)
Source?
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Sir_Cmpwn on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:43AM (#14247302)
>solved

"worked around" is more appropriate, and introduced huge problems with their workaround.

The correct solution is to punish ISPs that permit this behavior to continue unchecked. We need offense, not defense. Any ISP that doesn't detect and kill DDoS participants needs to be severely throttled by other ISPs. Organizations like the FCC should be tackling this and levying fines against US-based ISPs for non-compliance and lobbying for foreign policies that punish foreign ISPs.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by nojvek on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:56AM (#14247454)
It's really hard to know what constitutes DDOS traffic at times. Suppose a Netflix show got really popular, do you cut it off. Let's make an exception for Netflix. What if a new competitor blahflix got popular quickly, Does its traffic get blocked?

Oh wait now blahflix needs to pay $$$ to get special privileges. Shit gets hairy real quick.

Suppose DDOS happens from iot devices. One of this is an important medical device that got hacked. Do you auto shut it down and block it's traffic. What about the life critical device under same IP through NAT that is secure also getting blocked?

ISPs should remain dumb pipes. You really don't want to give comcast more power.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Sir_Cmpwn on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:16PM (#14247684)
>It's really hard to know what constitutes DDOS traffic at times. Suppose a Netflix show got really popular, do you cut it off. Let's make an exception for Netflix. What if a new competitor blahflix got popular quickly, Does its traffic get blocked?

Well, presumably companies have arrangements with their ISPs for expected usage and such. There can be a grace period as well, when you hit up the user and say "hey, you're using a lot of bw, is all well?" You also combine this with abuse reports from the victims if a DDoS is in fact underway. I don't think it's bad for an ISP to establish trust with a customer, either, this already happens with things like DMCA requests.

>Suppose DDOS happens from iot devices. One of this is an important medical device that got hacked. Do you auto shut it down and block it's traffic. What about the life critical device under same IP through NAT that is secure also getting blocked?

Life critical devices aren't exposed to the internet. IoT users should get throttled and receive a comminication from their ISP telling them they have a malicious device on their network with advice on how to fix the problem.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by 6d6b73 on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:03PM (#14247550)
"One of this is an important medical device that got hacked"

If someone puts "an important medical device" on a network directly accessible from the internet, or on the same network as other IOT crap devices, they should be banned from ever working with computers.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by richardthered on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:17PM (#14247695)
Elon Musk is working on direct brain interfaces with computers. Soon, they'll be able to hack your brain!
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by marcosdumay on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @01:03PM (#14248188)
You punish origin address forgery. That's enough.

If you are under attack and nobody is forging their origin, it's only a matter of you talking with your ISP to block the offenders.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by zeta0134 on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:02PM (#14247527)
This is a noble ideal that will never actually fly in practice. I can protect my site against DDoS by correcting architecture issues with one small set of companies: the hosting providers that my site sits behind, and the computers and architecture that make my solution work.

You're proposing that I protect my site by rewriting the rules for internet across the entire planet and punishing every single visitor (thousands upon thousands!!) who doesn't play by some new arbitrary rules that we then have to get everyone to agree on.

No, the ISPs should not be made to correct this kind of behavior, because it will be an eternal game of cat and mouse, and we've proven that the attackers can get around said blocks quite easily. Heck, often the "attackers" are grandma and grandpa types that clicked on a bad link and didn't know any better. Instead, we're taking the right approach here: identify bad incoming traffic at the destination, and drop it before it hits the backing servers. That's a solution we can actually reasonably apply.

I don't agree with a lot of what Cloud Flare is doing, and I really wish we had more than one service like it that was as popular as they are, but they are doing good work. They're solving a huge need within the industry. I believe there should be more competition in the space, but I refuse to believe that the overall approach is inherently bad when it obviously works.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Afforess on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:57AM (#14247472)
The solution can't be to hurt innocent traffic because a malicious user has some of the bandwidth. I agree some ISPs are complicit in the situation, but tit-for-tat approaches ultimately will hobble ISPs and create an irate and a distrustful internet. Even if you do create a magical technical solution that solves all the challenges without hurting bystanders, then you face an even bigger challenge: the status quo.

There is no way to get from our current situation to the world you propose - there will be never be a quorum from ISPs (or governments) on this sort of standard. It's a tragedy of the commons and no single participant has enough leverage or interest in a new status quo.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by anc84 on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:46AM (#14247330)
The insurance analogy would only work if they commonly had divisions of people who wrecked peoples' stuff.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by eeeeeeeeeeeee on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:47AM (#14247342)
As someone who has had their company targeted by persistent DDoS / ransoms and unable to afford protection from anyone else but Cloudflare, your statement is completely ignoring the enormous value that they provide and only focusing on the negative.

Centralization comes with risks, but I think the risk is absolutely acceptable in this case until we come up with a better, decentralized approach to attacks that normal people can afford.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by lepouet on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:00PM (#14247504)
I have a medium sized website, for 20$ a month they take 80% of the requests and bandwidth so i don't have to pay for a dedicated server and someone to run it.

I love them very much.

If they fuck up too often i can stop using them in 5 minutes, this is just perfect.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by ryanlol on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:34AM (#14247213)
While I entirely agree with everything you said, it's worth pointing out that Cloudflare isn't really at fault for this particular outage.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Sir_Cmpwn on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:37AM (#14247235)
Everyone is to blame here. Equal parts Cloudflare and everyone who uses their service.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by pyvpx on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:52AM (#14247404)
Telia ate it, not CF.

Telia eats it quite regularly, but not often at this magnitude.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by peferron on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:41AM (#14247275)
Cloudflare has a freemium model, so maybe you should find a better comparison than Twitter.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by Sir_Cmpwn on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @11:46AM (#14247332)
They both have revenue, just from different sources. The comparison isn't that bad. All VC-backed approaches (and public companies) eventually hit a growth cap, when their investors are going to expect unsustainable growth.
Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by peferron on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:39PM (#14247923)
Companies with unclear or ad-based business models, like Twitter, are more likely to end up doing sketchy things to stay in business. Of course you can find exceptions either way but I think it generally applies.

That being said, I agree that centralization sucks, and I'm thinking about symbolically moving my tiny blog off Cloudflare for this reason. The ridiculous thing is that the origin is on GitHub Pages, so I'll have to move off there as well to be coherent.

Re:Network Performance Issues in multiple locations by rnhmjoj on Tuesday May 02, 2017 @12:02PM (#14247531)
"Make the Internet work the way it should".