3 ms·

Akamai will certainly tank 665Gbps if you actually pay them for it... What kind of an insurance company would target likely victims anyway?

by ryanlol 10y ago

Analemma_ 10y ago
Is Akamai's DDoS protection tiered? That's not how it works for e.g. CloudFlare: you pay a flat fee and (they claim) they'll keep you up no matter the size or frequency of the attack. If Krebs simply wasn't signed up for a high enough tier than I guess Akamai did the right thing, but if they charge a flat fee for protection and make similar claims to CF then they deserve to be raked over the coals for this.
- ryanlol 10y ago
  That's not how CF works either, they'll force you to a custom plan if you get hit enough. If it wasn't clear, Krebs wasn't paying Akamai a penny. I'd assume their cheapest solutions start around 10k a month, hard to justify for a journo.
  - Analemma_ 10y ago
    Ok, I did not see Krebs' latest tweet that he was getting free service (https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/779111614226239488 https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/779111614226239488), that's a lot more justifiable. You'd think a netsec journalist would be the first to find it worth it to get on the paid plan.
    - ryanlol 10y ago
      >You'd think a netsec journalist would be the first to find it worth it to get on the paid plan. How much do you think a solo netsec journalist with only a couple of ads on his site earns?
      - pasbesoin 10y ago
        Krebs' reporting (now, after leaving the Washington Post under whatever circumstances -- cost cutting? -- on his own "blog"), has for years now shone a very useful, researched insight into various matters of important technological vulnerability. He provides a real service. Which is probably why Akamai offered him their services for free, in the first place. Krebs shines a light on shadows that very much don't want to be seen, much less outed. The years long level of escalating attacks against him and his site reflect this.
    - detaro 10y ago
      The "pro bono" part reads to me like Akamai offered him something he'd normally have to pay for for free, so he probably had a "paid plan" equivalent. Still understandable that Akamai dropped that after while, despite the PR damage, especially if it affected their work for paying customers.

Akamai will certainly tank 665Gbps if you actually pay them for it... What kind of an insurance company would target likely victims anyway?

by ryanlol 10y ago

Akamai will certainly tank 665Gbps if you actually pay them for it... What kind of an insurance company would target likely victims anyway?

Analemma_ 10y ago

Is Akamai's DDoS protection tiered? That's not how it works for e.g. CloudFlare: you pay a flat fee and (they claim) they'll keep you up no matter the size or frequency of the attack. If Krebs simply wasn't signed up for a high enough tier than I guess Akamai did the right thing, but if they charge a flat fee for protection and make similar claims to CF then they deserve to be raked over the coals for this.

ryanlol 10y ago
That's not how CF works either, they'll force you to a custom plan if you get hit enough. If it wasn't clear, Krebs wasn't paying Akamai a penny. I'd assume their cheapest solutions start around 10k a month, hard to justify for a journo.
- Analemma_ 10y ago
  Ok, I did not see Krebs' latest tweet that he was getting free service (https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/779111614226239488 https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/779111614226239488), that's a lot more justifiable. You'd think a netsec journalist would be the first to find it worth it to get on the paid plan.
  - ryanlol 10y ago
    >You'd think a netsec journalist would be the first to find it worth it to get on the paid plan. How much do you think a solo netsec journalist with only a couple of ads on his site earns?
    - pasbesoin 10y ago
      Krebs' reporting (now, after leaving the Washington Post under whatever circumstances -- cost cutting? -- on his own "blog"), has for years now shone a very useful, researched insight into various matters of important technological vulnerability. He provides a real service. Which is probably why Akamai offered him their services for free, in the first place. Krebs shines a light on shadows that very much don't want to be seen, much less outed. The years long level of escalating attacks against him and his site reflect this.
  - detaro 10y ago
    The "pro bono" part reads to me like Akamai offered him something he'd normally have to pay for for free, so he probably had a "paid plan" equivalent. Still understandable that Akamai dropped that after while, despite the PR damage, especially if it affected their work for paying customers.