Category Archives: DDoS Vendors

Amex Website Victim of DDoS Attack

Cyber attacks have become an alarming problem in recent months. Threats from China have been the main concern in America, but now a new type of hacker has surfaced. A group of Islamic internet hackers launched a distributed denial of service attack on the American Express website, temporarily shutting down the site for a few hours. As expected, this did not go over well with American Express cardholders. In a DDOS attack, site visitors are infected with a Trojan virus that redirects them to a site of the creator’s choice. Once a certain number of people visit that target site, the original site shuts down. The hackers were able to make this work successfully, but American Express’s security team quickly corrected the problem. Nevertheless, it shows how vulnerable American business is right now to Internet hackers. The hackers claimed that much of their motivation came from the YouTube video, Innocence of Muslims. Since its publication, that video has enraged the Islamic community and fueled their hatred of Americans. The cyber hackers vowed to continue their efforts until it was removed from the internet. The original video was in English, but there are now versions in Arabic, French, Spanish and other languages. It has been blocked in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Muslim states. The video was actually removed once before because of a slew of hate mail going towards the original uploader. It was re-posted shortly thereafter and has since received close to two million views. American Express is now taking extra precautions to ensure that similar events do not happen in the future. Source: http://www.lowcards.com/amex-website-hacked-islamic-attackers-11690

Read the original:
Amex Website Victim of DDoS Attack

Bitcoin exchange: Greedy traders to blame for DDoS attack

Bears bearing botnets? The soaring value of crypto-currency Bitcoin stuttered slightly last night – after a main exchange for the currency was flooded with network traffic and Bitcoin wallet site Instawallet was suspended.…

Taken from:
Bitcoin exchange: Greedy traders to blame for DDoS attack

Mt. Gox under largest DDoS attack as bitcoin price surges

The largest bitcoin exchange said Thursday it is fighting an intense distributed denial-of-service attack it believes is intended at manipulating the price of virtual currency, which has seen volatile price swings in the past few days. Mt. Gox, which is based in Tokyo, said the attacks have caused its worst trading lags ever and caused error pages to be displayed to traders, according to a post on Facebook. By its own calculation, 80 percent of the bitcoin trades in U.S. dollars are executed on Mt. Gox’s trading platform and 70 percent of all trades in other currencies. The lag of six or seven seconds before a trade is executed “is not acceptable,” said Gonzague Gay-Bouchery, marketing for Mt. Gox, in a phone interview. But he cautioned that Mt. Gox’s trading platform isn’t like those of the New York Stock Exchange or the Nasdaq. The price surge, which saw bitcoin hit as much as US$142 per coin on Wednesday, has caused malicious opportunists to try and game the system, according to Mt. Gox. Attackers have waited until bitcoin’s price hits a high, sell their bitcoins and then start a DDoS attack that destabilizes the exchange. They hope bitcoin holders will panic and sell, causing the price to drop. The attackers can then buy the cheaper bitcoins and try the attack again when the price floats higher. The latest DDoS attack started last night Japan time and intensified around 5 a.m. this morning, Gay-Bouchery said. Mt. Gox uses a Florida-based security vendor, Prolexic, to fend off attacks, but “they have been slower than usual to catch what happened,” he said. Gay-Bouchery said he wasn’t sure when the attacks would subside. He warned bitcoin traders not to panic or invest more money than they’re willing to lose. Traders should also use Mt. Gox’s options for two-factor authentication in order to prevent their accounts from being hacked. Mt. Gox is in the midst of a major technical overhaul of its exchange. Gay-Bouchery said Mt. Gox is rebuilding its trading platform from the ground up. The system is in testing now, but Mt. Gox hopes to have it live by the end of the year. “It takes a lot of time to make something bulletproof,” he said. “We cannot release something half-baked.” The trading platform will be separated from the front-end website, which will make it immune from the problems it has faced in the last few days, he said. Mt. Gox doesn’t release much information on its systems in order not to tip off hackers. Mt. Gox has seen a surge in people applying to trade on its platform. In 2012, between 9,000 to 11,000 people signed up per month, Gay-Bouchery said. In January, those numbers doubled, and in February, the numbers tripled. The exchange saw more than 60,000 people sign up in March, which has caused delays in verifying accounts. Mt. Gox will raise trading limits if people supply identification to comply with anti-money laundering rules. The exchange is also working with external companies to streamline the verification process and beefed up its internal account verification team to more than 20 people. “I really would like to stress that people trust us with a lot of money right now,” Gay-Bouchery said. “We want to do everything by the book. We may appear slow in many respects but we are taking our time to do it right.” For DDoS protection click here . Source: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/040413-mt-gox-under-largest-ddos-268385.html?page=1

See the article here:
Mt. Gox under largest DDoS attack as bitcoin price surges

How you may have inadvertently participated in recent DDoS attacks

The botnets driving the recent distributed denial of service attacks are powered by millions of infected computers. Their coordinated flood of requests overwhelms the Internet’s DNS servers, slowing them down and even knocking the servers offline. The long-term solution for site operators and visitors alike may rely on reluctant ISPs working together. The risk that an Internet-connected computer is infected with malware will never be reducible to zero. It’s just the nature of software that errors happen. Where there are software-design errors, there are people who will exploit those errors to their advantage. The best PC users can hope for is to minimize the chances of an infection and to mitigate the damage a piece of malware can inflict — whether it intends to steal a user’s sensitive data or to commandeer the machine as part of a cyber attack on servers thousands of miles away. Last week, Internet users were caught in the crossfire of an online battle. On one side were spammers and other nefarious types who send malware via e-mail. On the other was the spam-fighting organization Spamhaus. As Don Reisinger reported last Wednesday, several European sites experienced significant slow-downs as a result of the attack, which may have also involved criminal gangs in Russia and Eastern Europe. In a post last Friday, Declan McCullagh explained that the technology to defeat such attacks has been known for more than a decade, although implementing the technology Internet-wide is difficult and, practically speaking, may be impossible. So where does that leave your average, everyday Internet user? Our ability to prevent our machines from being hijacked by malware will always be limited by our innate susceptibility. We’re simply too likely to be tricked into opening a file or Web page we shouldn’t. PC infection rates hold steady despite the prevalence of free antivirus software. Even the best security programs fail to spot some malware, as test results by A-V Comparatives indicate (PDF). For example, in tests conducted in August 2011, Microsoft Security Essentials was rated as Advanced (the second-highest scoring level) with a detection rate of 92.1 percent and “very few” false positives. Since we’ll never eliminate PC infections, the best defense against botnets is not at the source but rather at the point of entry to the ISP’s network. In July of last year the Internet Engineering Task Force released a draft of the Recommendations for the Remediation of Bots in ISP Networks that points out the challenges presented by bot detection and removal. Unfortunately, detecting and removing botnets isn’t much easier for ISPs. When ISPs scan their customers’ computers, the PC may perceive the scan as an attack and generate a security alert. Many people are concerned about the privacy implications of ISPs scanning the content of their customers’ machines. Then there’s the basic reluctance of ISPs to share data and work together in general. Much of the IETF’s suggested remediation comes down to educating users about the need to scan their PCs for infections and remove those they discover. While most virus infections make their presence known by slowing down the system and otherwise causing problems, the stealth nature of many bots means users may not be aware of them at all. If the bot is designed not to steal the user’s data but only to participate in a DDoS attack, users may feel no need to detect and delete the bot. One of the IETF report’s suggestions is that ISPs share “selective” data with third parties, including competitors, to facilitate traffic analysis. In March of last year the Communications Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council released its voluntary Anti-Bot Code of Conduct for ISPs (PDF). In addition to being voluntary, three of the four recommendations in the “ABCs for ISPs” rely on end users: Educate end-users of the threat posed by bots and of actions end-users can take to help prevent bot infections; Detect bot activities or obtain information, including from credible third parties, on bot infections among their end-user base; Notify end-users of suspected bot infections or help enable end-users to determine if they are potentially infected by bots; and Provide information and resources, directly or by reference to other sources, to end-users to assist them in remediating bot infections. A paper titled “Modeling Internet-Scale Policies for Cleaning up Malware” (PDF) written by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Stephen Hofmeyr and others suggests that having large ISPs working together to analyze traffic at points of entry to their network is more effective than bot detection on end-user machines. But that doesn’t get us off the hook entirely. If every Windows PC were scanned for malware once a month, there would be far fewer bots available for the next DDoS attack. Since CNET readers tend to be more tech-savvy than average, I suggest a computer-adoption program: everyone scan two or three PCs they suspect aren’t regularly maintained by their owners (such as relatives) on a pro bono basis. Here are three steps you can take to minimize the possibility that a Windows PC will be drafted into a botnet army. Don’t use a Windows administrator account The vast majority of malware targets Windows systems. In large part it’s simply due to numbers: there are so many more installations of Windows than any other operating system that leveraging Windows maximizes a piece of malware’s effectiveness. Many people have no choice but to use Windows, most likely because their employer requires it. For many others, using an OS other than Windows is impractical. But very few people need to use a Windows administrator account on a daily basis. In the past two years I’ve used only a standard Windows account on my everyday PC, with one or two exceptions. In fact, I often forget the account lacks administrator privileges until a software installation or update requires that I enter an administrator password. Using a standard account doesn’t make your PC malware-proof, but doing so certainly adds a level of protection. Set your software to update automatically Not many years ago, experts advised PC users to wait a day or two before applying patches for Windows, media players, and other applications to ensure the patches didn’t cause more problems than they prevented. Now the risk posed by unpatched software is far greater than any potential glitches resulting from the update. In May 2011 I compared three free scanners that spot outdated, insecure software. My favorite of the three at the time was CNET’s own TechTracker for its simplicity, but now I rely on Secunia’s Personal Software Inspector, which tracks your past updates and provides an overall System Score. The default setting in Windows Update is to download and install updates automatically. Also selected by default are the options to receive recommended updates as well as those labeled important, and to update other Microsoft products automatically. Use a second anti-malware program to scan the system Since no security program detects every potential threat, it makes sense to have a second malware scanner installed for the occasional manual system scan. My two favorite manual virus-scanning programs are Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and Microsoft’s Malicious Software Removal Tool, both of which are free. I wasn’t particularly surprised when Malwarebytes found three instances of the PUP.FaceThemes virus in Registry keys of my everyday Windows 7 PC (shown below), but I didn’t expect the program to detect four different viruses in old Windows system folders on a test system with a default configuration of Windows 7 Pro (as shown on the screen at the top of this post). An unexpected benefit of the malware removal was a reduction in boot time for the Windows 7 machine from more than two minutes to just over one minute. Help for site operators who come under attack DDoS attacks are motivated primarily by financial gain, such as the incident last December that emptied a Bank of the West online account of $900,000, as Brian Krebs reported. The attacks may also be an attempt to exact revenge, which many analysts believe was implicated in last week’s DDoS onslaught against Spamhaus. The government of Iran was blamed for a recent series of DDoS attacks against U.S. banks, as the New York Times reported last January. Increasingly, botnets are being directed by political activists against their opposition, such as the wave of hacktivist attacks against banks reported by Tracy Kitten on the BankInfoSecurity.com site. While large sites such as Google and Microsoft have the resources to absorb DDoS attacks without a hiccup, independent site operators are much more vulnerable. The Electronic Frontier Foundation offers a guide for small site owners to help them cope with DDoS attacks and other threats. The Keep Your Site Alive program covers aspects to consider when choosing a Web host, backup alternatives, and site mirroring. The increasing impact of DDoS attacks is one of the topics of the 2013 Global Threat Intelligence Report released by security firm Solutionary. Downloading the report requires registration, but if you’re in a hurry, Bill Brenner offers a synopsis of the report on CSO’s Salted Hash blog. As Brenner reports, two trends identified by Solutionary are that malware is increasingly adept at avoiding detection, and Java is the favorite target of malware exploit kits, supplanting Adobe PDFs at the top of the list. The DNS server ‘vulnerability’ behind the DDoS attacks The innate openness of the Internet makes DDoS attacks possible. DNS software vendor JH Software explains how DNS’s recursion setting allows a flood of botnet requests to swamp a DNS server. CloudShield Technologies’ Patrick Lynch looks at the “open resolvers” problem from an enterprise and ISP perspective. Paul Vixie looks at the dangers of blocking DNS on the Internet Systems Consortium site. Vixie contrasts blocking with the Secure DNS proposal for proving a site’s authenticity or inauthenticity. Finally, if you’ve got two-and-a-half hours to kill, watch the interesting panel discussion held in New York City last December entitled Mitigating DDoS Attacks: Best Practices for an Evolving Threat Landscape. The panel was moderated by Public Interest Registry CEO Brian Cute and included executives from Verisign, Google, and Symantec. I was struck by one recurring theme among the panel participants: we need to educate end users, but it’s really not their fault, and also not entirely their problem. To me, it sounded more than a little bit like ISPs passing the buck. For DDoS protection click here . Source: http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-57577349-285/how-you-may-have-inadvertently-participated-in-recent-ddos-attacks/

Link:
How you may have inadvertently participated in recent DDoS attacks

Airlock launches secure cloud hosting

Airlock launched its Secure Cloud Platform which offers enterprise-level security features like intrusion detection, hardware and web application firewalls, DDoS mitigation and malware scanning. Airlo…

Read More:
Airlock launches secure cloud hosting

Call centers under attack in targeted cyber-blackmail scheme

Crooks blasting public-safety phone lines with calls The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has cautioned public-safety call centers against the rise of so-called telephony denial of service (TDoS) attacks, which it says have the potential to cripple local telephone exchanges.…

Read the article:
Call centers under attack in targeted cyber-blackmail scheme

iMessage DDoS attacks foreshadow a bigger threat

Over the last couple of days, a group of iOS developers has been targeted with a series of rapid-fire texts sent over Apple’s iMessage system. The messages, likely transmitted via the OS X Messages app using a simple AppleScript, rapidly fill up the Messages app on iOS or the Mac with text, forcing a user to constantly clear both notifications and messages. In some instances, the messages can be so large that they completely lock up the Messages app on iOS, constituting a ‘denial of service’ (DoS) attack of sorts, even though in this case they appear to be a prank. Obviously, if the messages are repeated an annoyingly large volume but don’t actually crash the app, they’re still limiting the use you’ll get out of the service. But if a string that’s complex enough to crash the app is sent through, that’s a more serious issue. The attacks hit at least a half-dozen iOS developer and hacker community members that we know of now, and appear to have originated with a Twitter account involved in selling UDIDs, provisioning profiles and more that facilitate in the installation of pirated App Store apps which are re-signed and distributed. The information about the source of the attacks was shared by one of the victims, iOS jailbreak tool and app developer iH8sn0w. “On Wednesday night my private iMessage handle got flooded with “Hi” and “We are anonymous” bulls**t,” iH8sn0w tells us. He immediately disabled that iMessage email and began tracking the sending email domain’s current ownership. iH8sn0w shared a proof-of-concept AppleScript with us that demonstrates just how easy it is to set up a recurring message that could saturate a person’s iMessage queue with items that would need to be cleared or read before any actions could be taken. Another iOS developer targeted, Grant Paul, shared some additional details about the attacks. “What’s happening is a simple flood: Apple doesn’t seem to limit how fast messages can be sent, so the attacker is able to send thousands of messages very quickly,” Paul says. The second part of that, he explains, is that if a user sends a ‘complex’ text message using unicode characters that force a browser to render ‘Zalgo’ text, or simply uses a message that is enormous in size, them the Messages app will eventually crash as it fails to display it properly. This will effectively ‘break’ the Messages app on iOS by forcing it to close and stop it from re-opening because it can’t render that text.” The ‘send a big message to crash the app’ method has been known for a while, as we were able to locate a month-old public posting that detailed an accidental triggering of this. The solutions involve playing around with sending a regular message, then locking the phone and activating the message notification until you’re able to time it right to delete the message thread that’s causing the problem. This is the way that Paul was able to finally delete the complex text that was causing him problems. Several of the developers we spoke to noted that multiple ‘throwaway’ emails were being used to send the spam, so while a simple ‘block’ option might work for a casual spammer, they wouldn’t work for a determined harasser. iH8sn0w notes that there is a possibility that Apple will notice these bursts of messages and block the repetitive spamming. This appears to be the only real solution as Apple does not currently allow you to block a specific iMessage sender. Once your iMessage ID is out there, you’re unable to stop people from using it. And since the latest version of iOS unifies your phone number and emails, there’s a strong possibility that if a person can ferret out your email, they can spam you with this annoying or disruptive technique. The only recourse right now is to disable that iMessage handle entirely. And if they get your phone number, it’s likely you’ll have to turn off iMessage entirely, because you can’t just change your phone number at the drop of a hat. Thankfully, this doesn’t seem to be a widespread practice, but it’s not that hard to figure out, and the only real solution will be the introduction of a block setting for Messages and better spam detection by Apple. We have informed Apple about the technique used in these cases but it has not responded with more information. We will update the article if it does so. Source: http://thenextweb.com/apple/2013/03/29/imessage-denial-of-service-prank-spams-users-rapidly-with-messages-crashes-ios-messages-app/

Continued here:
iMessage DDoS attacks foreshadow a bigger threat

Week in review: Massive DDoS attack targets Spamhaus, Amazon S3 buckets leaking, and cyber espionage deterrence

Here's an overview of some of last week's most interesting news, podcasts, videos and articles: What do users look for in a security solution? Users are aware of the dangers in the Internet and …

Visit site:
Week in review: Massive DDoS attack targets Spamhaus, Amazon S3 buckets leaking, and cyber espionage deterrence