3 ms·
> Nothing technically novel. But evidently it was at least a somewhat novel stress test execution for GitHub’s live systems, otherwise surely it would have been
by rewmie 3y ago
> Nothing technically novel. But evidently it was at least a somewhat novel stress test execution for GitHub’s live systems, otherwise surely it would have been dealt with sooner and messaged with less benefit of the doubt to the user.
Not really. This is boring stuff, and odds are they never bothered with it because a) it has no impact on operations, b) the blast radius of this doesn't go beyond the attacker's own repo, c) no moron with time to kill bothered attempting this stunt until now.
Probably now some low-level employee at GitHub needs to add a metric and an alarm to react to rate limits to prevent moron copycats from pulling this stunt for attention-seeking.
Not smart, not clever. Just boring vandalism.
- eyelidlessness 3y ago[flagged]
- rewmie 3y ago> Wow, you’ve really done a crack up job ruining any possibility of interesting discussion here. What interesting discussion? Any owner of any service in production is well aware of how mundane it is to have third parties poking and prodding around to assess service limits. Some people have too much idle time on their hands.
- eyelidlessness 3y agoThe interesting discussion is that apparently ~no one did this for well over a decade, and now we have information about where service degrades. We didn’t have that to talk about before, now we do.