5 ms·
The argument is that the servers aren't a problem - the problem is that we don't have a protocol to block them. Of course, we wouldn't need a protocol to block
by dagenix 4y ago
The argument is that the servers aren't a problem - the problem is that we don't have a protocol to block them. Of course, we wouldn't need a protocol to block them if they weren't a problem. I'm very confused by this argument.
- admax88qqq 4y ago"X isn't the problem, Y is" is the overconfident way of saying "Y is a better solution to the problem"
- cypress66 4y agoMisconfigured servers that can amplify are only one way to DDoS attack. Even if this wasn't a problem you would still have all the other ways to DDoS, which you could handle easier if you could actually block the traffic. So yes, we would still need that protocol.