3 ms·

This isnt a good thing, its a bad thing. Name.com basically buckled from a threat and made this user move to a new registrar. Hopefully next time they dont dem

This isnt a good thing, its a bad thing. Name.com basically buckled from a threat and made this user move to a new registrar. Hopefully next time they dont demand name.com reveal private whois or something else. Good on them for not suspending the domain/user, but this was NOT the customers problem. They had a legitimate website and you chose to take the easy way out. You should not have asked the customer to leave to another host, you should have fixed the problem yourself. It is your responsibility as a infrastructure provider to have adequate DDoS prevention in place. Passing the buck to every extortionist that comes in is not acceptable behavior. Now that people know that name.com is easy to push around, I suspect much more of these attacks will be likely. Best not to use name.com nameservers apparently.

res0nat0r 14y ago
It isn't that simple. Every provider has to weigh keeping up a single site, or having thousands of other customers impacted. Also there are few companies in the world that can handle gigabit DDoS attacks without a scratch, all of these things have to be considered.
justauser 14y ago
When large entities are involved, it's not unheard of these days for a DDOS attack to be in the size of 50+ Gb/s . There are not many providers that can withstand this and maintain a responsive platform for other customers. If DDOS attacks are now being organized by nation states, how would you keep your business running? I don't think Name.com did anything wrong here.
rwallace 14y ago
Name.com did, to their credit, resist the demands long enough to allow the domain to be moved to a new registrar instead of being simply dropped or handed over to the attackers. Having adequate defenses in place to withstand any attack, even one of unprecedented scale, would of course be the ideal. Are you offering to pay higher fees to finance this?
Monotoko 14y ago
I sympathize with the provider here, if the systems weren't designed to take the heat, do they continue trying to defend (at the risk of the other 1.5 mil) when they believed they couldn't keep everything online, or discuss with the user how to put their domain somewhere with more resources to defend against this kind of attack? Any small company would do the same (hosting etc) to stop everything going offline. You can't blame name.com for being overwhelmed, because this sounds like a DDoS from an organized group who knew what they were doing, which is quite hard to mitigate against.
- alain94040 14y ago
  What if, instead of asking for the domain, they had asked for $10,000, would you have paid? What about $1M? Where do you stop? I sure hope that my registrar would never give in to anything like this, and would actually know how to defeat DDOS.
toomuchtodo 14y ago
Since when is providing advanced DDOS/DOS protection included with sub-$100/month hosting plans?

res0nat0r 14y ago

It isn't that simple. Every provider has to weigh keeping up a single site, or having thousands of other customers impacted. Also there are few companies in the world that can handle gigabit DDoS attacks without a scratch, all of these things have to be considered.

justauser 14y ago

When large entities are involved, it's not unheard of these days for a DDOS attack to be in the size of 50+ Gb/s . There are not many providers that can withstand this and maintain a responsive platform for other customers. If DDOS attacks are now being organized by nation states, how would you keep your business running? I don't think Name.com did anything wrong here.

rwallace 14y ago

Name.com did, to their credit, resist the demands long enough to allow the domain to be moved to a new registrar instead of being simply dropped or handed over to the attackers. Having adequate defenses in place to withstand any attack, even one of unprecedented scale, would of course be the ideal. Are you offering to pay higher fees to finance this?

Monotoko 14y ago

I sympathize with the provider here, if the systems weren't designed to take the heat, do they continue trying to defend (at the risk of the other 1.5 mil) when they believed they couldn't keep everything online, or discuss with the user how to put their domain somewhere with more resources to defend against this kind of attack? Any small company would do the same (hosting etc) to stop everything going offline. You can't blame name.com for being overwhelmed, because this sounds like a DDoS from an organized group who knew what they were doing, which is quite hard to mitigate against.

alain94040 14y ago
What if, instead of asking for the domain, they had asked for $10,000, would you have paid? What about $1M? Where do you stop? I sure hope that my registrar would never give in to anything like this, and would actually know how to defeat DDOS.

toomuchtodo 14y ago

Since when is providing advanced DDOS/DOS protection included with sub-$100/month hosting plans?