3 ms·
Exactly. The author already said "10-15% larger than other similar ones we've seen inthe past". Doesn't that make a record-changing by definition? :)
by knighthacker 14y ago
Exactly. The author already said "10-15% larger than other similar ones we've seen inthe past". Doesn't that make a record-changing by definition? :)
- mbell 14y agoRecord changing from a scientific definition? Yep. But, when the relatively non-technical populous hears 'record changing' a completely different set of emotions are triggered in their brains. Its just like any other overly grandios marketing headline, designed to excite those whom aren't familiar with the topic.
- lsc 14y agowell, what I got from the article was that the person was saying "We aren't the whole internet, this is larger than what we normally see, but not by a huge margin." - which is to say, it's possible that other providers have seen larger DDoS attacks.
- icambron 14y agoIt does. But consider all the other times this record must have been broken -- wasn't a big news story. Incremental increases in the bytes/second record just aren't, by themselves, that interesting.
- hhw 14y agoThat's from GTT/NLayer's perspective, which is just one of many Tier 2 network providers. Tier 1 networks are more likely to see the largest attacks.