The era of the Vigilante

As per recent news, there have been agressive measures taken against the hacking and spamming community.

Blue Frog has developed a program, which essentially does a DDos on their mail servers until they they make the decision to not spam the people on the list (said to be at 1 million and growing) (there is more techical information to this statement, so if I am wrong, just correct me)

The spammers tried to DDos bluesecurity.org and they were able to take them down for a little while.

I also recall some articles on the botnets, and ethics relating to them. One person said, perhaps the only solution to fixing the botnets, is to hack them, and be able to control them, and be able to deactivate them some how. The ISPs are not doing their jobs of disabled customers with botnets, or even giving a shit if that stuff if passing through their networks.

Is this a time of war? Do you think its gonna get worse, and what are your ethical views on this little war that is starting?

botnets with encrypted tunnels. No can defend.

You wouldn't know what kind of traffic they have.

unless you're brute-force DDoSing someone, in which case you can try and obfuscate the fact, but you still have to have a certain amount of bandwidth pumping out.

of course, you also can try and own more machines so you can distribute the load more, making it less obvious on smaller targets.

The war has already begun:

http://digg.com/technology/SPAMmers_really_pissed_off_at_bluesecurity,_read_their_message_board

hack the planet, imo

What if your bots can do spoofed IP or with an amplificiation attack to DDoS a vic?

Reboot the interweb.

Rob

Only Al Gore knows what to do

"What if your bots can do spoofed IP"

ISP's should be checking egress for spoofed IP's, and preferrably dropping spoofs.

bet a bunch don't, though.

"or with an amplificiation attack to DDoS a vic?"

amplification attacks definitely change the equation, that's why I said "brute force DDoS".

then again, the better your amp attack, the fewer zombies you need.

Doesn't the mac address show up in packets?

Someone explain amplification?

"brute force" DoS - scales with the amount of bandwidth.

you pump out 256Kb of traffic from a hijacked computer on a cable line - the target server gets 256Kb of extra traffic.

amplification attacks either 1. allow one machine to use the resources of many others for attacks, 2. or manipulate flawed services offered by the target machine to get a DoS with less traffic.

for the example of #1 - it was once possible to send a special kind of spoofed ICMP traffic to vulnerable servers, where, if you had the resources of a modem, you could get the equivalent of a few T1 lines blasting a target by sending this traffic to other servers.

for the example of #2 - there are network services called "chargen" (CHARacter GENerator) and "echo" - chargen reads back some characters when you send it a packet with a few characters, and echo simply repeats whatever is sent to it.

anyway, by sending spoofed traffic to the "chargen" service on a machine with the service, and having it send traffic addressed to the echo service on another m machine or the same machine (which is to be send back to the chargen service on the first machine)...

you could have the machine(s) services DoS each other and the machine with what is basically an infinite loop in network terms.

^^^ knows Al Gore personally.

he doesn't.

rare group photo with warez included -

http://www.disasm.com/Hackers.jpg

lol

Dude, I sell security.

^^^ Dell Dude, voice.