Anonymous planning to take down the internet on March 31

For example, simple software firewalls like iptables (simple compared to enterprise-grade hardware firewall) lets you to limit response packets to 1/sec (adjustable according to your need). So the administrators could adjust the limit to the load that the equipment can handle.

By doing this it won't kill the traffic but slow it down. So if Anonymous actually does this, it'll just slow traffic to a crawl, it won't kill it completely.

deltatux

 

Debends how much you can slow it... Will result in timeout at some point.

But as BetA posted: https://twitter.com/#!/YourAnonNews/statuses/170243270801231872

"FYI - We have no idea about this 'Operation Global Blackout' rumour that's spreading around. Sounds like another #opFacebook fail-op."

Someone might have posted it to this thread before too, but I have not noticed.

 

great, i hope they succeed in taking down the interweb, but they should make it permanent, no pr0n, guru3d, torrents, $hitbook and Twatter people will start killing each other.

eviiiiiiiillllll

 

Plans some out door activities for March 31st

 

I thought internet constisted of thousands and thousands of servers across the world.
How is hacking 13 servers going to take the whole internet down?!

 

If been thinking the same imagine anonymous hacking dns server and routing everything to 1 malicious site infecting every computer on the world to join 1 large scale raid

 

That is a daunting thought.

*Gets back in box*

 

They are preparing our security folks for the inevitable internet war.

 

oh, these clowns again. let me know when they actually do something worth talking about.

 

Well anonymous, on 3/31 I'm planning to hijack Nasas space shuttle and keep it in orbit for a week. So take that.

 

I'm planning bedroom activies.

 

The Internet is made of millions (arguably billions) of nodes worldwide. However, in order to World Wide Web all work, something must be able to translate domain names to IP addresses that machines can understand.

It's inefficient and nearly impossible for the DNS system to work without some sort of centralization. The role of the root servers is a basically a giant digital Rolodex.

How it works is that whenever you query a domain name, say google.com. If your local DNS server which caches DNS queries does not have google.com, then it'll query for the authoritative DNS server.

Authoritative DNS servers are servers that have the actual DNS entry for a particular domain name on the Internet. Most servers, including the one that your ISP and third parties like OpenDNS, are caching DNS servers, that means they don't actually have the DNS entry. So how do these caching DNS servers work to get the entry from the authoritative servers so that your DNS query gets answered? The root servers. There are 13 root DNS servers (really clusters as they are not single nodes) that are scattered throughout the world and they have a large list of all active domain registrars on the Internet.

So when your local DNS server doesn't know an answer or don't know who the authoritative DNS server is for a domain name, it queries the root server that's responsible to provide your local DNS server with who that authoritative server is and provide it with the IP address of the authoritative DNS server to reply IP address of the domain name you're trying to reach. If the local DNS server knows who the authoritative server for a domain name, it'll never query the root DNS servers.

So on paper, if you teardown all 13 root domain name "servers", then the World Wide Web would technically stop working (assuming you don't know the IP of the website you're trying to reach) since the critical link that links all the authoritative DNS servers around the world is gone.

One major issue with this Anonymous plan that turned out to be a false rumour is that, to make the DNS root "servers" more resilient, 9 of 13 of these servers are not hosted at a single physical location but use something called Anycast which adds both performance and redundancy. It'll forward your DNS request to the closest node or cluster of nodes (that participates as a part of the root server network) closest to you. So even if Anonymous was able to take down 1 node (or cluster of nodes), there's still a couple dozen of nodes (or cluster of nodes) that are acting as the "13 root servers".

Also, according to the Internet Systems Consortium, there was a similar real-world attack that occurred in 2002 against all 13 root servers. While it caused great congestion on the root servers, the end users saw little to no effects. Remember, in 2002, these root servers haven't been deployed using Anycast so even before Anycast, this type of attack was thwarted. For more: http://www.isc.org/f-root-denial-of-service-21-oct-2002

Here's an easier to digest information about root servers at Root-Servers.org which keeps a list of root servers operating worldwide: http://www.root-servers.org/presentations/rootops-gac-rio.pdf

EDIT: Upon rereading that original "Anonymous" post describing the theoretical attack (which has since been called as a hoax by YourAnonNews), is that it assumes that the 13 root DNS servers are just that, 13 machines or small clusters of servers that won't be able to absorb the attack. However, what they fail to realize is that the "13 root DNS servers" are actually 13 different root server operators. Each operator has their own address and hundreds (if not thousands) of servers scattered around the world that provide root DNS services.

deltatux

 

Does we have a confirmation (twitter feed?) that this is real?
Because as many pointed out, DNS is not 'hive based', with thousand(?) of dns resolvers (Configuring your modem to pick a quick one is one technique to boost internet conectivity/lookup time).
It would be strange and againts this mentality if the resolvers would start to fail if any central server goes down (this could happen if there is a design fault, but unlikely IMO).

Anyway, this would be good, 4 teh lawlz.


In other news:

ANOMINOUS LAUNCH OPERATION AGAINTS HUNGER:

http://pastebin.com/5VQgXffP


edit: just saw your edit, deltalux. But the hunger op is a thing, seriously.

 

Yes, a single man invented the Internet. :bang:

 

good luck anon, I'd like to see that happen..

Maybe a couple of EMP bombs would be able to actually do it..

 

dude, do some research before you post. your emabrrassing yourself.

it was created by DARPA for military use and back then it was known as ARPANET. tim berners-lee, is only credited for the ease of use and public adoption of the web.

 

The issue for most people, and this includes some IT people is that they constantly mix up the Internet and World Wide Web. The Internet is NOT the World Wide Web. The World Wide Web is just a part of the Internet.

The Internet is what Firestorm stated. However, the World Wide Web is more than just "for the ease of use and public adoption of the web." The creation of the World Wide Web is so much more than that. Berners-Lee created the first web browser, HTTP and HTML. He made it possible for there to be a standardized information sharing system where multiple nodes can serve information effectively and that became the World Wide Web.

deltatux

 

Oh noes, they're going to take down...the internet...

 

lol, why a Linksys router? lol

deltatux

 

They don't have the manpower or resources to launch an attack capable knocking out all those nodes for considerable amount of time.