Pages:
Author

Topic: POOLS under DDOS ATTACKS - page 2. (Read 5463 times)

newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
July 07, 2011, 04:56:12 PM
#28
Slush makes 1500 BTC daily with a 2% fee, that's about $13,000 a month. That could buy some serious bandwidth

So Slush's pool is solving 1500 blocks daily? That's why difficulty keeps increasing every two days....
And I'm glad I'm part of it, i get about 0.02 BTC out of every block, giving me a profit of 1500*0.02=30BTC per day! Not.

But you probably meant 1500 BTC per month, which would fit the rest of your message :-)
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
July 07, 2011, 04:45:05 PM
#27
Is there a sure way to make sure my computer isn't infected with some botnet crap? I'd hate to think I"m contributing to this in some sort of way.

will an antivirus program recognize it as a trojan or something?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
July 07, 2011, 04:37:25 PM
#26
Perhaps the affected pool owners could post a bounty for the botnet owner's identity...
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
July 07, 2011, 04:31:03 PM
#25
HYIPs always get DDos'd when they start up. Now, why on earth would the people attack HYIPs?

Obviously, the government does not want people making money or getting ahead. Not necessarily the government but operatives within the gov, working for the CIA or bankers, but mostly just working to keep the rich, rich, and the poor, poor.

When Bitcoin mining gets DDos'd, it tells me, personally, that the people who do not wish others to make money in this way, are the ones who are attacking. I doubt that it's frustrated people. I think it's collaborative among gov agencies, working privately.

Of course it's just a guess and i'm paranoid and always offer up the conspiracy-ended possibility, but you have to look at "where is the motive"? and "who benefits"?

People overlook the fact that central bankers control a whole lot of computers, people and corporations, as well as governments themselves. And then they overlook the fact that doing this would definitely be in their interest.

Just saying, I don't think it's random hackers.

Occam's Razor says it's a botnet hearder that's pissed because they got locked out of the 4 largest polls (and probably more) and is DDOS'ing the pools instead.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 251
July 07, 2011, 03:02:29 PM
#24
HYIPs always get DDos'd when they start up. Now, why on earth would the people attack HYIPs?

Obviously, the government does not want people making money or getting ahead. Not necessarily the government but operatives within the gov, working for the CIA or bankers, but mostly just working to keep the rich, rich, and the poor, poor.

When Bitcoin mining gets DDos'd, it tells me, personally, that the people who do not wish others to make money in this way, are the ones who are attacking. I doubt that it's frustrated people. I think it's collaborative among gov agencies, working privately.

Of course it's just a guess and i'm paranoid and always offer up the conspiracy-ended possibility, but you have to look at "where is the motive"? and "who benefits"?

People overlook the fact that central bankers control a whole lot of computers, people and corporations, as well as governments themselves. And then they overlook the fact that doing this would definitely be in their interest.

Just saying, I don't think it's random hackers.
sr. member
Activity: 304
Merit: 250
Do your part for Bitcoin!
July 07, 2011, 02:53:05 PM
#23
The pool operators could get another ingress to their 'head end' servers and be protected by another provisioned path, or split up their pools to sub-pools operating on different providers. Just a strategy to provide numerous smaller targets than one big one. Or everyone could go to solo-mining, but I doubt that would happen.



Even if you distribute server pools to smaller servers, it's not hard for a bot herder to just direct their DDOS to 4 smaller server as opposed to 1 big server. BTC Guild was split up into 5 independent providers and still got successfully DDOS attacked. Also you can't protect servers from DDOS by using ingress servers. If all traffic has to go through the ingress server, the bot herder just points at the ingress and everyone gets locked out. If you are trying to ban at the server level you are already fucked. One of the biggest issues associated with Bitcoin Pools is that Mining itself looks like a DDOS so it is very hard to distinguish between the two.

The only answers to DDOS prevention:
A) Have huge pipes

or

B) GET THE CRAP OFF OF GRANDMAS SHITTY COMP.
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 1121
July 07, 2011, 02:36:10 PM
#22
The pool operators could get another ingress to their 'head end' servers and be protected by another provisioned path, or split up their pools to sub-pools operating on different providers. Just a strategy to provide numerous smaller targets than one big one. Or everyone could go to solo-mining, but I doubt that would happen.

member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
July 07, 2011, 01:56:43 PM
#21
25k bots is a hell of a lot, do you have any figures for this or are you making it up?

The number was just an example. Even a thousand on home cable is a lot in terms of targetable bandwidth. If each can do 100KiB/sec outbound that's nearly 100MiB/sec pointed somewhere.
newbie
Activity: 46
Merit: 0
July 07, 2011, 01:55:00 PM
#20
I wish we could fight back...
You have my bow!
sr. member
Activity: 321
Merit: 250
Firstbits: 1gyzhw
July 07, 2011, 01:20:48 PM
#19
Yeah, but the hacker controlling a group of 25,000 infected PCs on broadband has very serious bandwidth, and he doesn't have to pay for it.

25k bots is a hell of a lot, do you have any figures for this or are you making it up?
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
July 07, 2011, 01:09:29 PM
#18
... hackers ...

No. A botnet owner is, no matter which definition of 'hacker' you adhere to, not a hacker. A botnet owner is a botnet owner.

To run a botnet you do not have to have any skills in programming, penetrating security, or basically anything other than knowing how to throw the right amount of money at the right people.

Relevant: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html#what_is
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
July 07, 2011, 01:07:48 PM
#17
Slush makes 1500 BTC daily with a 2% fee, that's about $13,000 a month. That could buy some serious bandwidth

Yeah, but the hacker controlling a group of 25,000 infected PCs on broadband has very serious bandwidth, and he doesn't have to pay for it.
sr. member
Activity: 321
Merit: 250
Firstbits: 1gyzhw
July 07, 2011, 01:05:36 PM
#16
Slush makes 1500 BTC daily with a 2% fee, that's about $13,000 a month. That could buy some serious bandwidth
sr. member
Activity: 304
Merit: 250
Do your part for Bitcoin!
July 07, 2011, 12:18:49 PM
#15
Well if anything it will make the pool admins more aware of the holes in their systems.

facepalm...do you know how botnets work?

The only real way for admins to stop a ddos attack from crippling is to A) wait it out B) have so much connection bandwidth a ddos attack does nothing. So you are telling server owners to buy ridiculous amounts of bandwidth?

It's like saying the solution to people stealing gas out of your car is to buy more gas.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1015
July 07, 2011, 12:10:15 PM
#14
I wish we could fight back...
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
July 07, 2011, 11:58:57 AM
#13
I think it's more sinister.  An attack by those who are threatened by what BTC is capable of.
newbie
Activity: 46
Merit: 0
July 07, 2011, 11:55:50 AM
#12
More likely a botnet owner was pissed at being banned from a certain pool & his btc being donated to the faucet.

I have heard that this is specifically why the DDoS attacks are occurring.
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
July 07, 2011, 11:16:18 AM
#11
BOTNETS are in computer terminology AIDS for PCs
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
July 07, 2011, 11:03:00 AM
#10
Well if anything it will make the pool admins more aware of the holes in their systems.
legendary
Activity: 938
Merit: 1001
bitcoin - the aerogel of money
July 07, 2011, 10:58:38 AM
#9
Pool attacks are a good thing because they increase "effective difficulty".  Cheesy
Pages:
Jump to: