3 ms·
Interesting to note that the favicon is still there. If it was a DNS attack, you would assume it wouldn't be there (unless the attackers put it on their box, wh
by drusenko 17y ago
Interesting to note that the favicon is still there. If it was a DNS attack, you would assume it wouldn't be there (unless the attackers put it on their box, which seems not very likely).
Given that and the speed at which the service recovered, I'm going to say it does not seem like a DNS attack.
- rglullis 17y agoCouldn't the favicon be there just because it was previously cached in the browser?
- drusenko 17y agoVery possibly. But AFAIR IE is the only notoriously favicon caching browser, the rest of them do a good job of updating it often. And the favicon is showing up in multiple screenshots on both FF and Chrome.
- riffraff 17y agoIIRC twitter images are served from S3, so probably just a different dns?