![]() ![]() ![]() The purported owner of the Bangstresser tool said in a post that users could theoretically buy enough firepower to conduct an attack at a size of more than 400 Gbps with a so-called "layer 4" attack. However, the source who successfully helped mitigate a similar attack by New World Hackers on their company said that - based off an analysis of the attack - the group likely used a tool called Bangstresser - apparently contradicting Ownz's claims that it developed its own web interface, which we previously reported. Was your data stolen by hackers? (HInt: it probably was.) These companies lost your data in 2015's biggest hacks, breaches The burden of proof falls squarely on the hacktivist group, which failed to back up its claims after repeated requests, leading us to alternative explanations. The last known case of an Amazon botnet was two years ago.Īn older attack carried out by the group was not considered "sophisticated in nature," according to one source who spoke to us, who was actively involved in mitigating that previous attack. Amazon has been tapped by botnet controllers before, but only in a handful of cases. To conduct an attack that big would require a botnet, a collection of infected devices that are turned onto a single target to overload it with traffic. In an email, he said a botnet would be almost out of the question but it would be possible for a more advanced form-based attack or an application layer attack rather than a botnet.īut even if the attackers were able to launch a successful attack that left Amazon's servers, it wouldn't take long for Amazon to notice, he said. Khalil Sehnaoui, a security researcher and founder of Krypton Security, also poured cold water on the group's claims. The retail and cloud giant has made similar statements before regarding claims of groups using its cloud platform for nefarious reasons.Ī spokesperson for Amazon did not comment on the BBC's case. In a scenario where an attack is launched from its service, Amazon can just as quickly stop it in its tracks. In the vast majority of cases, attacks don't leave the company's servers. In a follow-up conversation last week, the hacktivist said the group "programmed a bypass linked to proxies" so that monitoring firms "wouldn't detect it anyway."Ī source with direct technical knowledge of Amazon's systems and internal processes, who did not want to be named as they were not authorized to speak on the record, dismissed the allegation, saying that it "doesn't line up" with how Amazon's cloud service works.Īmazon's Web Services (AWS) has a number of manual and automatic systems and measures that stop denial-of-service attacks from being launched. The hacktivist's grandiose claim that it used Amazon's cloud service to conduct the attack was almost believable.įollowing the attack, Ownz said that the size of the web assault was made possible by using at least two "Amazon servers." The hacktivist said the group has "ways of bypassing Amazon," referring to the company's systems which prevent web attacks from being carried out. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |