Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Microsoft is ruining the internet

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/06/16/akamai_attack_highlights_threat_from_bot_networks.html

Bot networks screw up akamai, which hoses a lot of other people.

Thanks for the swiss cheese.

Mike
Saturday, June 19, 2004

Funny thing... There is a link in the article to "DDoS blackmail schemes" which leads to a story about how an e-commerce firm was threatened with DDoS unless it paid.

Sure enough, they don't miss the opportunity for a good ad:

"The Columbus, Ohio company's turnkey order processing system allows customers to open online stores for a $49 setup fee and a percentage of each charge, and pays merchants twice a month. 2Checkout says it processed more than $100 million in transactions in 2003, and more than $53 million thus far this year."

There must be lots of e-commerce providers, what better way to stand out?

If I had a firm, I'd *pay* to be attacked just to make the news :)

Alex
Sunday, June 20, 2004

> Thanks for the swiss cheese.

Bah, it's all about people not patching their machines. If John Q Public had Linux or OSX they still wouldn't patch their machines, and there'd be the same problems.

Matthew Lock
Sunday, June 20, 2004

"Microsoft is ruining the internet"

What is this, Slashdot?  Get that weak stuff outta here.

Clutch Cargo
Sunday, June 20, 2004

No this isn't slashdot, this http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/15/1427213 is slashdot. At least slashdot had the sense to realise that it was Akamai that is ruining the internet and Microsoft was nothing but a helpless customer.

It also affected Yahoo, Google, Fedex, Xerox, and Apple but of course nobody would ever accuse them of any wrongdoing.

Of course all of these companies (with Akamais help) can be seen to be ruining the internet as pointed out by the first slashdot poster the fact that it is reducing large portions of the internet to a single point of failure.

Chris Ormerod
Sunday, June 20, 2004

As I gather the machines that hosted the source code for Win2000 and Halflife 2 were Linux machines.

somemorone
Sunday, June 20, 2004

Some Morone,

Im not sure what your point is but you can be pretty sure the win2000 code was on a Winfile server, but according to all reports I have read the HL2 code was in CVS on Linux.

Still, I don't see the point of your post to this discussion.

Chris Ormerod
Sunday, June 20, 2004

>>"Bah, it's all about people not patching their machines. If John Q Public had Linux or OSX they still wouldn't patch their machines, and there'd be the same problems."

Exactly right.

Right now, there's a hundred million clueless users out there who continue to launch executable attachments because they have absolutely no understanding of the most basic concepts - like what an "executable" file is.  Firewall?  no clue how to install it or configure it.

For years people have been pushing the idea of the computer as an appliance, "as easy to use as a toaster".  All of the problems with worms/viruses are ultimately a result of this mindset.

www.MarkTAW.com
Sunday, June 20, 2004

Mike,

I'm really having a hard time following your logic.  I don't see how you can conclude that "Microsoft is ruining the internet".

Akamai (which MS happens to own a stake in), fell victim to a massive DDoS attack.  This was not made possible by any vulnerability in Windows (at least I see no mention of it in the linked-to article).  It was a deliberate, coordinated attack.

There is no mention of what was used to control the zombie machines.  They could have all be Linux machines, or BeOS for that matter.  Sure, you can SPECULATE that it was a Windows vulnerability, but you really have no idea.

Furthermore, Akamai uses Linux for most of it's web hosting, NOT Windows.  http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=akamai.com

If anything, I think this nicely underscores a point that I've made before in this forum.  If a computer system is connected to the Internet, it is vulnerable to remote attack.  It doesn't matter what OS you're using.  If you're connected, your vulnerable.

I also wrote about this in my weblog, see http://www.semack.net/Articles/PracticalSecurityInMissio.html

Myron A. Semack
Sunday, June 20, 2004

Your logic is flawed. Are you a troll?

MyNameIsSecret();
Sunday, June 20, 2004

Should we blame the matches? should we blame the fire? or the doctor who allowed him to expire? NO! Blame Canada!
/South Park


When security fails its usually because of several minor failures contributing to a big one. To single out one thing (The OS or the Users) is counter productive and gives you an unrealistic perspective.

Its a chain of events, and for the security to fail, EVERY link in the chain must fail.

Eric Debois
Sunday, June 20, 2004

"There is no mention of what was used to control the zombie machines.  They could have all be Linux machines, or BeOS for that matter.  Sure, you can SPECULATE that it was a Windows vulnerability, but you really have no idea."

Well, what OS is on the spam zombies?  I'd bet the same one is on the machines that launched the attacks.  I'd be willing to speculate money on that.

To be fair Akamai is running some hybred dns of their own that to hear Paul Vixie tell it is a poor architecture as far as fault tolerance.  Basically they have a monoculture.  Had they architected differently they might be less vulnerable. 

Mike
Sunday, June 20, 2004

Chris Ormerod ,

I was responding to the title of this thread.

And I was getting at that GNU/Linux is not perfect and network security should be handled by a sysadmin and not the OS default install.

somemorone
Monday, June 21, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home