Author Archives: Enurrendy

Cyber-Attacks Cost Almost Twice What You May Think

What do cyber-attacks have in common with hurricanes, tornados and earthquakes? All are realities in our world. No matter how common or uncommon they may be, failing to prepare for any of them will lead to costs that could be unbearable—or worse. These were the thoughts of Nikhil Taneja, MD Radware as he shared the company’s annual Global Application & Network Security Report 2016-17 that identifies major attack trends of 2016, outlines industry preparedness, and offers predictions for in 2017. The report finds that 98% of Organizations Experienced Attacks in 2016, indicating that cyber-attacks became a way of life for nearly every organization in 2016. This trend will continue in 2017, predicts Radware. While understanding some crucial aspects such as The threat landscape—who the attackers are, their motives and tools, what will be the potential impact on businesses, including associated costs of different cyber-attacks, how a company’s preparedness level compares to other organizations etc, the report comes up with some of the key findings: – IoT Botnets Open the 1TBps Floodgates- This exemplifies why preparing for “common” attacks is no longer enough. This event introduced sophisticated vectors, such as GRE floods and DNS water torture. – Cyber-Ransom Proves Easiest, Most Lucrative Tool for Cybercriminals- Almost all ransom events have a different attack vector, technique or angle. There are hundreds of encrypting malware types, many of which were developed and discovered this year as part of the hype. Also, DDoS for ransom groups are professionals who leverage a set of network and application attacks to demonstrate their intentions and power. – Cyber-Attacks Cost Almost Twice What You May Think- Most companies have not come up with a precise calculation of the losses associated with a cyber-attack. Those who have quantified the losses estimate the damage at nearly double the amount compared to those who estimate. – Stateful Devices: #1 Point of Failure- Common IT devices, including firewalls, application delivery controllers and intrusion protection systems, now represent the greatest risk for an outage. Consequently, they require a dedicated attack mitigation solution to protect them. Threat Landscape Trends The report identifies top five trends that dominated 2016 threat landscape and will continue to haunt CISOs in the coming years. These include: – Data Leakage + SLA Impact Are Top Concerns – Data leakage and service level impact often come together, with a DDoS attack serving as a smokescreen that distracts IT teams so data can be infiltrated. – Mirai Rewrites the Rules- As the first IoT open-source botnet, Mirai is changing the rules of real-time mitigation and makes security automation a must. It isn’t just that IoT botnets can facilitate sophisticated L7 attack launches in high volumes. The fact that Mirai is open-source code means hackers can potentially mutate and customize it—resulting in an untold variety of new attack tools that can be detected only through intelligent automation. – Non-Volumetric DoS: Alive and Kicking – Despite astonishing volumes, neither the number of victims nor the frequency of attacks has grown. Most non-volumetric DDoS attacks are in relatively lower volumes, with 70% below 100Mbps. Rate-based security solutions continue to fall short, requiring companies to rethink their security strategy and embrace more sophisticated solutions. Without those upgrades, there is a good chance an organization will experience, yet lack visibility into service degradation. – Increased Attacks against Governmental Institutions- 2016 brought a new level of politically affiliated cyber protests. While the U.S. presidential election was in the spotlight, the media reported on a different breach almost weekly. These incidents happened across the globe, with regimes suffering from cyber-attacks due to alleged corruption or perceived injustices. – SSL-Based Attacks Continue to Grow- Although 39% report suffering an SSL-based attack, only 25% confidently state they can mitigate it. – DDoS Attacks Are Becoming Shorter- Burst attacks are increasing thanks to their effectiveness against most mitigation solutions. Security Strategy Evolves Rather Slowly These trends and findings indicate that while hackers continue to develop new attack tools and techniques, 40% of organizations do not have an incident response plan in place. Seventy percent do not have cyber-insurance. And despite the prevalence of ransomware, only 7% keep Bitcoin on hand. Another interesting finding of the study was three-fourths of companies do not employ hackers in their security teams, and 43% say they could not cope with an attack campaign lasting more than 24 hours. “Combining statistical research and frontline experience, the Radware report identifies trends that can help educate the security community. It draws information from sources such as the information security industry survey, where this year, 598 individual respondents representing a wide variety of organizations around the world participated,” Taneja commented. On average, responding organizations have annual revenue of USD $1.9 billion and about 3,000 employees. Ten percent are large organizations with at least USD 5 billion in annual revenue. Respondents represent more than 12 industries, with the largest number coming from the following: professional services and consulting (15%), high tech products and services (15%), banking and financial services (12%) and education (9%), the study notes. Source: http://www.cxotoday.com/story/cyber-attacks-cost-almost-twice-what-you-may-think/

Continue reading here:
Cyber-Attacks Cost Almost Twice What You May Think

New Mirai IoT variant launched 54-hour DDoS attack against a U.S. college

Researchers have spotted a new Mirai variant in the wild that is better at launching application layer attacks; other researchers spotted a new Cerber ransomware variant that can evade machine learning. A new variant of the Mirai IoT malware was spotted in the wild when it launched a 54-hour DDoS attack against an unnamed U.S. college. While the attack occurred on February 28, Imperva Incapsula is informing the world about it today. The researchers believe it is a new variant of Mirai, one that is “more adept at launching application layer assaults.” The average traffic flow was 30,000 requests per second (RPS) and peaked at about 37,000 RPS, which the DDoS mitigation firm said was the most it has seen out of any Mirai botnet so far. “In total, the attack generated over 2.8 billion requests.” During the 54-hour DDoS attack on the college, researchers observed a pool of attacking devices normally associated with Mirai such as CCTV cameras, DVRs and routers. Attack traffic originated from 9,793 IPs worldwide, but 70% of the botnet traffic came from 10 countries. The U.S. topped the list by having 18.4 percent of the botnet IPs. Israel was next with 11.3 percent, followed by Taiwan with 10.8 percent. The remaining seven countries of the top 10 were India with 8.7 percent, Turkey with 6 percent, Russia with 3.8 percent, Italy and Mexico both with 3.2 percent, Colombia with 3 percent and Bulgaria with 2.2 percent of the botnet traffic. Other signature factors such as header order and header values also helped the researchers identify the attack as a Mirai-powered botnet, yet the DDoS bots hid behind different user-agents than the five hardcoded in the default Mirai version; it used 30 user-agent variants. Incapsula said, “This–and the size of the attack itself–led us to believe that we might be dealing with a new variant, which was modified to launch more elaborate application layer attacks.” Less than a day after the 54-hour hour attack on the college ended, another was launched which lasted for an hour and half; during the second attack, the average traffic flow was 15,000 RPS. 90% of application layer attacks last less than six hours, Incapsula said, so “an attack of this duration stands in a league of its own.” The researchers said they “expect to see several more bursts before the offender(s) finally give up on their efforts.” Cerber ransomware variant evades machine learning Elsewhere, Trend Micro also has bad news in the form of a new Cerber ransomware variant. Cerber has “adopted a new technique to make itself harder to detect: it is now using a new loader that appears to be designed to evade detection by machine learning solutions.” The newest Cerber variant is still being delivered via phishing emails, but those emails now include a link to Dropbox which downloads and self-extracts the payload. If the loader detects it is running in a virtual machine, in a sandbox, or if certain analysis tools or anti-virus are running, then the malware stops running. Cerber stops, Trend Micro said, if it detects any of the following are running: msconfig, sandboxes, regedit, Task Manager, virtual machines, Wireshark, or if security products from the vendors 360, AVG, Bitdefender, Dr. Web, Kaspersky, Norton or Trend Micro are running. Trend Micro explained: Self-extracting files and simple, straightforward files could pose a problem for static machine learning file detection. All self-extracting files may look similar by structure, regardless of the content. Unpacked binaries with limited features may not look malicious either. In other words, the way Cerber is packaged could be said to be designed to evade machine learning file detection. For every new malware detection technique, an equivalent evasion technique is created out of necessity. Source: http://www.computerworld.com/article/3186175/security/new-mirai-iot-variant-launched-54-hour-ddos-attack-against-a-us-college.html

Read the article:
New Mirai IoT variant launched 54-hour DDoS attack against a U.S. college

CyberSecurity Malaysia in Asia Pacific drill to combat DDOS attacks

National digital security specialist CyberSecurity Malaysia has taken part in an Asia Pacific drill to test preparedness for DDOS attacks. Themed ‘Emergence of a New Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Threat,’ this year’s Asia Pacific Computer Emergency Response Team’s (APCERT) drill tested different response capabilities of leading Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRT) from the Asia Pacific economies. Throughout the exercise, which was completed on 22 March 2017, the participating teams activated and tested their incident handling arrangements. Commenting on the operation, Dato’ Dr. Haji Amirudin Abdul Wahab, chief executive officer of CyberSecurity Malaysia, said: “Our participation in the APCERT drill is very important indeed as we believe nations in the Asia Pacific region should band together and collaborate more closely to enhance our skills, expertise and process in incident response handling to increase our vigilance against the current trends of DDoS threats.” Dr Amirudin said that CyberSecurity Malaysia and its counterparts in the region are deepening collaboration to target and mitigate DDoS threats. DDOS increase in Malaysia He added that in Malaysia, incidents involving DDoS attacks have been on the rise for the past three years. Such attacks reported to CyberSecurity Malaysia increased to 66 in 2016, almost double from 38 incidents in 2015. In 2014, the incidents recorded stood at 38. As of February 2017, CyberSecurity Malaysia has recorded 11 incidents involving DDoS attacks. The APCERT drill included interaction with local and international CSIRTs/CERTs, and victim organisations, for the coordinated suspension of malicious infrastructure, analysis of malicious code, as well as notification and assistance to affected entities. In addition to Malaysia, 23 APCERT teams from 17 other economies (Australia, Brunei, People’s Republic of China, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Macao, Mongolia, Myanmar, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam) along with 4 CSIRTs from 4 member countries (Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria and Pakistan) of the OIC-CERT participated in the drill. Held for the sixth time, this year’s drill also involved the participation of members from the Organisation of the Islamic Cooperation – Computer Emergency Response Team (OIC-CERT). CyberSecurity Malaysia, which is the permanent secretariat for the OIC-CERT, leads the cyber security efforts among the OIC member countries. APCERT was established by leading and national Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs) from the economies of the Asia Pacific region to improve cooperation, response and information sharing among CSIRTs in the region. APCERT Operational Members consist of 28 CSIRTs from 20 economies. OIC-CERT was established in January 2009, to provide a platform for member countries to explore and to develop collaborative initiatives and possible partnerships in matters pertaining to cyber security that shall strengthen their self-reliant in the cyberspace. OIC-CERT consists of 33 CERTs, cyber security related agencies and professional from 20 economies. Source: https://www.mis-asia.com/tech/security/cybersecurity-malaysia-in-asia-pacific-drill-to-combat-ddos-attacks/

More here:
CyberSecurity Malaysia in Asia Pacific drill to combat DDOS attacks

Korean foreign ministry gets several DDoS attacks from China

The website of South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has come under several cyberattacks originating from China but little damage has been reported so far, the ministry said Tuesday. “Several on-and-off DDoS attack attempts originating from China have taken place on websites including that of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” ministry spokesman Cho June-hyuck said in a press briefing. Defensive measures were immediately taken against the cyberattacks and no damage has been sustained, he said. The latest hacking attempts came as bilateral tensions remain high over the deployment of a US missile defense system in South Korea. Since the attempts, the foreign ministry has launched a special response team and distributed a response manual among the South Korean diplomatic missions in China, the spokesman noted. The spokesman did not elaborate on exactly who is behind the DDoS, or distributed denial of service, attacks, but they are the latest in a recent series of Chinese retaliations on South Korean industries and entities. A month earlier, the Chinese-language website of South Korean retail giant Lotte as well as its duty-free branch’s Chinese and Japanese-language websites sustained similar DDoS assaults, incurring heavy revenue losses. The attacks came as China stepped up its retaliatory actions over Seoul’s on-going deployment of the US missile interception system, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. China vehemently protests the deployment which it said would compromise its security interests. “Our government pays attention to the Chinese government’s (past) expression of its consistent stance that it opposes any kind of cyberattack,” the ministry spokesman noted. “The government is expecting that (China) will continuously take responsible steps in accordance with the stance.” South Korea has also recently lodged a protest with the Chinese government after South Korean national flags were found destroyed in China, Cho said. “A national flag is a symbol of a nation’s dignity and the government takes very seriously the cases of destroyed Taegeukgi that took place in certain Chinese areas,” he said. “The government has officially lodged complaints with China on many occasions and demanded China take steps to address them immediately.” “In any case, the people-to-people exchange which is the foundation of the bilateral relationship should come under a man-made obstacle,” the spokesman said, adding that the South Korean government is trying to proactively react to China’s unjust measures in order to minimize any impact on South Korean companies. Referring to a media report alleging North Korean involvement in hacking attempts at a Poland bank and other international financial institutions, Cho also said that North Korea is likely to be using illegal cyber activities for a source of foreign currency earnings. “Given the international community’s concerns over the possibility that illegal income could be used for the development of weapons of mass destruction, North Korean cyber threats are emerging as new international threats along with its nuclear, missile and WMD threats.” (Yonhap) Source: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20170328000862

Follow this link:
Korean foreign ministry gets several DDoS attacks from China

A DDoS attack is cheaper than a pack of doughnuts

Cybercriminals organising DDoS attacks are making a profit of around $18 per hour, says Kaspersky. Do you know how much it costs to hire hackers for a DDoS attack? I’m asking for a friend. Anyway, Kaspersky Lab seems to know the answer as its researchers have spent some time looking into DDoS-as-a-service websites, and have come up with some numbers. As it turns out, it’s can be pretty cheap to have a website DDoSed, even though that could mean losses for the victim, in millions. It seems as hackers are undervaluing their services, yet again. In a press release, Kaspersky Lab said a DDoS attack can cost “anything from $5 for a 300-second attack, to $400 for 24 hours”. The average price for an attack is approximately $25 an hour. Using a cloud-based botnet of 1,000 desktops will set you back roughly $7 per hour. “That means the cybercriminals organising DDoS attacks are making a profit of around $18 per hour.” http://www.itproportal.com/news/a-ddos-attack-is-cheaper-than-a-pack-of-doughnuts/The definitive price is determined by a couple of factors. First, what type of devices are being used. An IoT-botnet is cheaper than a server-botnet. The type of site that needs to be attacked can also be a factor. Government sites, or those with dedicated DDoS protection, will be more expensive. “We expect the profitability of DDoS attacks to continue to grow. As a result, will see them increasingly used to extort, disrupt and mask other more intrusive attacks on businesses,” commented says Russ Madley, Head of B2B at Kaspersky Lab UK. “Worryingly, small and medium sized businesses are not confident in their knowledge of how to combat these threats effectively. The longest DDoS attack in 2016 lasted 292 hours according to Kaspersky Lab’s research, or about 12 days. Most online businesses can ill-afford to have their ‘doors closed’ for even an hour, let alone for 292 hours, as criminals take advantage of their poor defences. Companies that host these online sites are also under attack on a daily basis. The channel has a significant opportunity with our help to identify risks, provide strategic advice and deliver the right solutions to customers to prevent damaging DDoS attacks.” Source: http://www.itproportal.com/news/a-ddos-attack-is-cheaper-than-a-pack-of-doughnuts/

Original post:
A DDoS attack is cheaper than a pack of doughnuts

Criminal benefits: profit margin of a DDoS attack can reach 95%

Kaspersky Lab’s researchers have discovered the full extent of the profit margins benefiting criminals from DDoS services that are available on the black market. Kaspersky Lab’s experts have studied the DDoS services available on the black market and determined just how far this illegal business has advanced, as well as the extent of its popularity and profitability. The worrying news is that arranging an attack costs as little as $7 an hour, while the targeted company can end up losing thousands, if not millions, of dollars. The level of service involved when arranging a DDoS attack on the black market is not very different from that of a legal business. The only difference is that there’s no direct contact between the provider and the customer. The ‘service providers’ offer a convenient site where customers, after registering, can select the service they need, pay for it, and receive a report about the attacks. In some cases, there is even a customer loyalty program, with clients receiving rewards or bonus points for each attack. There are a number of factors that affect the cost for the customer. One is the type of attack and its source: for example, a botnet made up of popular IoT devices is cheaper than a botnet of servers. However, not all those providing attack services are ready to specify such details. Another factor is the duration of the attack (measured in seconds, hours and days), and the client’s location. DDoS attacks on English-language websites, for example, are usually more expensive than similar attacks on Russian-language sites. Another big factor affecting the cost is the type of victim. Attacks on government websites and resources protected by dedicated anti-DDoS solutions are much more expensive, as the former are high risk, while the latter are more difficult to attack. For instance, on one DDoS-as-a-service website, the cost of an attack on an unprotected website ranges from $50 to $100, while an attack on a protected site costs $400 or more. It means a DDoS attack can cost anything from $5 for a 300-second attack, to $400 for 24 hours. The average price for an attack is around $25 per hour. Kaspersky Lab’s experts were also able to calculate that an attack using a cloud-based botnet of 1000 desktops is likely to cost the providers about $7 per hour. That means the cybercriminals organising DDoS attacks are making a profit of around $18 per hour. There is, however, yet another scenario that offers greater profitability for cybercriminals – it involves the attackers demanding a ransom from a target in return for not launching a DDoS attack, or to call off an ongoing attack. The ransom can be the bitcoin equivalent of thousands of dollars, meaning the profitability of a single attack can exceed 95 per cent. In fact, those carrying out the blackmail don’t even need to have the resources to launch an attack – sometimes the mere threat is enough. “We expect the profitability of DDoS attacks to continue to grow. As a result, will see them increasingly used to extort, disrupt and mask other more intrusive attacks on businesses. Worryingly, small and medium sized businesses are not confident in their knowledge of how to combat these threats effectively. The longest DDoS attack in 2016 lasted 292 hours according to Kaspersky Lab’s research, or about 12 days,” said says Russ Madley, head of B2B at Kaspersky Lab UK. “Most online businesses can ill-afford to have their ‘doors closed’ for even an hour, let alone for 292 hours, as criminals take advantage of their poor defences. Companies that host these online sites are also under attack on a daily basis. The channel has a significant opportunity with our help to identify risks, provide strategic advice and deliver the right solutions to customers to prevent damaging DDoS attacks.” Interestingly, some cybercriminals have no scruples about selling DDoS attacks alongside protection from them. Kaspersky Lab’s experts, however, do not recommend using criminal services. Source: http://www.information-age.com/connected-cities-suffer-catastrophic-blackouts-123465253/

Taken from:
Criminal benefits: profit margin of a DDoS attack can reach 95%

Did you know: Crimelords behind DDoS attacks offer customer loyalty points?

Tweaking business models for greater 404 kerching The DDoS attack business has advanced to the point that running an attack can cost as little as $7 an hour, while the targeted company can end up losing thousands, if not millions of dollars.…

View the original here:
Did you know: Crimelords behind DDoS attacks offer customer loyalty points?

The Short List of Who Protects Companies Against DDoS Attacks

Here’s a question: when was the last time you got something truly useful for free? Like that time it turned out your phone company was giving you mobile data even though it wasn’t included in the plan you selected, or that time you turned up at the car dealership for a major repair, and they informed you the cost was covered because you’re just such a great customer. Oh right: it was never. So why is it that so many companies seem to think somebody else is responsible for protecting them against distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks? DDoS mitigation is an important and complex service that requires careful expertise, on-demand or always-on deployment, nearly limitless scalability and huge amounts of network bandwidth. If a company hasn’t taken the steps to invest in this kind of protection, they don’t have it. Attack overview A DDoS attack is a distributed denial of service attack, which is a cyberattack that uses a botnet, a network of internet-connected devices that have been hijacked for remote use, to direct large amounts of malicious traffic at a website that has been targeted. This traffic overwhelms the website, its server or its resources to take it offline or render it so frustratingly slow it can’t be used. Distributed denial of service attacks have been a problem for websites and organizations of all sizes for over 15 years, and the problem is becoming a crisis as DDoS for hire services steadily gain popularity, and botnets steadily gain in size due to unsecured Internet of Things devices. For larger organizations, a successful DDoS attack can cost between $20,000 and $100,000 per hour, and while unquantifiable, the loss of user trust or loyalty that can result from such an attack can be even worse. Erroneous assumptions DDoS attacks haven’t exactly been flying under the radar lately. Their frequency, as well as the threat they pose, should be well known to anyone working in online security. Yet a recent survey by Kaspersky uncovered some staggering statistics. Thirty percent of companies surveyed indicated that they haven’t taken action against the threat of DDoS attacks because they believe they won’t be targeted, 40% believe their ISP will provide protection, and a further 30% believe data centers will provide protection. Perhaps most misguided of all, 12% believe a small amount of DDoS-caused downtime would not have a negative impact on the company. Why ISPs won’t provide complete protection While some ISPs do provide complete DDoS protection as an added service that clients pay good money for, most provide only partial protection. Due to the large amounts of bandwidth an ISP has available, they can do well against large volumetric attacks, but craftier application layer attacks are a problem. Also, while ISPs can be good at identifying malicious traffic, they don’t deal with that malicious traffic efficiently, meaning that while it’s struggling to deal with an influx of malicious traffic, legitimate traffic will be caught in the bottleneck with it or even discarded alongside the bad traffic, resulting in users unable to get through to the website. In other words, while a basic DDoS attack could be thwarted by an ISP, the result – users unable to access the website – ends up being the same. Further, some DDoS attacks like the Slowloris are made up of traffic and requests that are seemingly legitimate, making them difficult to detect for even some intrusion detection systems, let alone an ISP. Perhaps the biggest problem with relying on an ISP for protection is that regardless of what type of attack is launched, there isn’t going to be a quick response from an ISP. They aren’t built for the kind of real-time monitoring and deployment that can catch an attack within seconds. Most often, it will be several hours before an ISP begins to deal with an attack. By then, the damage is done. Why data centers won’t provide complete protection either There’s a caveat here: just as with ISPs, some data centers do provide complete protection against distributed denial of service attacks, but again it is an added service that definitely adds to the data center bill. Similar to ISPs, data centers do provide some measure of DDoS protection, but it can generally only protect against basic attacks that can be stopped with rate limiters, or attacks that are not directly aimed at an application service. Large or complex attacks cannot be stopped by basic data center protection. Moreover, not only do ISPs and data centers not provide complete protection against DDoS attacks, but they also put their clients at a bigger risk of second-hand DDoS damage. If an ISP or data center is struggling with a large or complex attack, websites that weren’t targeted will nonetheless suffer the effects. A-Z protection Professional DDoS protection is built to provide the quickest, most proactive and most complete protection against distributed denial of service attacks. Cloud-based protection is especially excellent at protecting against both network-layer and application-layer attacks, and with the use of a scrubbing server, attack traffic will be kept from ever touching the target website while legitimate traffic is let through unfettered. For companies after a more bang-for-their-buck solution, it may be preferable to look into a quality content delivery network (CDN). CDNs are designed to improve site speed and performance, and all CDNs offer some level of DDoS protection due to the built-in load balancing that comes from their multi-server environments. However, CDNs will also offer additional DDoS protection on top of that. High-quality distributed denial of service protection won’t become a freebie or throw-in until the internet reaches a phase where there’s something so much worse and so much more common than DDoS attacks that they become almost after-thoughts for all the malicious cyberattackers out there. So companies can either root for that reality, or take protection into their own hands by investing in solid DDoS protection. Source: http://www.iotevolutionworld.com/iot/articles/430637-short-list-who-protects-companies-against-ddos-attacks.htm

Read More:
The Short List of Who Protects Companies Against DDoS Attacks

Servers hosting Daphne Caruana Galizia’s website suffer ‘unprecedented’ DDoS attack

The servers hosting Daphne Caruana Galizia’s personal blog have suffered a DDoS attack. A DDos (denial of service) attack occurs when many systems flood the bandwidth of a targeted system, in an attempt to make the online service unavailable. Mrs Caruana Galizia does not yet know who is behind the attack, but did say it is highly likely to be a person of Maltese nationality.. Prior to the DDoS attack on the servers, she said, a fake Gmail account was setup – similar to her personal email address. The person who created the account, then emailed two persons working for the company who handle software support for the website, and tried to acquire information required to hack the site through them. This, however, did not work and the software support personnel realised that it was not Mrs Caruana Galizia’s email address, and also the use of broken English in the email. This, she said, is what led her to believe that the person behind the attack is Maltese. The police were contacted aftewr the DDOS attack occurred later, and an investigation is ongoing. The fake Gmail address used a proxy server, and thus far no culprit has been identified, she said. She explained that aside from the crime involving the DDoS attack, impersonation is also a crime. Vanilla Communications, a server hosting company owned by David Thake, hosts Daphne Caruana Galizia’s personal blog – a service that she pays for each month, she said. In a Facebook post, Mr Thake said that the servers hosting her website suffered a DDoS attack which he called “unprecedented in scale.” Mr Thake, in his post, said the attack brought the network to its knees. Source: http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2017-03-21/local-news/Servers-hosting-Daphne-Caruana-Galizia-s-website-suffer-unprecedented-DDOS-attack-6736171884

Follow this link:
Servers hosting Daphne Caruana Galizia’s website suffer ‘unprecedented’ DDoS attack