4 ms·
Even if they tried to mitigate and quietly semi failed (like 30% packet loss) the PR would have been better. It could be that such attack takes down their entir
by cft 10y ago
Even if they tried to mitigate and quietly semi failed (like 30% packet loss) the PR would have been better. It could be that such attack takes down their entire network hard. Verisign said a year ago to us they could mitigate 2Tbps for comparison.
- pbarnes_1 10y agoAkamai can easily mitigate this. They just don't want to provide it for free. And pretty much no one can afford to use their services @ 655Gb/s for that long unless they had billions of $.
- cft 10y agoWell a single 48 hr mitigation costs 12k/yr contact. Unlimited mitigations probably cost about 130k/yr. Either this negative PR is worth 12-100k in savings for them or they would drop any paying customer if the attack is over a certain threshold?
- 4ad 10y agoThey might bill you that money, but on average it costs them less to provide that service to you, otherwise they wouldn't make any money. Because we don't know the operating margins and the distribution of DDoS costs per customer, we can't infer how much this particular attack would cost Akamai.
- krzyk 10y agoAccording to Kerbs (https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/778398865619836928 https://twitter.com/briankrebs/status/778398865619836928) Akamai did mitigate this DDOS, they kicked him of after the attack, not during.