5 ms·
Jesper addressed this in the IRC channel. Basically, the traffic was not actually reaching the box, it was just saturating the available bandwidth to the EBS st
by tghw 17y ago
Jesper addressed this in the IRC channel. Basically, the traffic was not actually reaching the box, it was just saturating the available bandwidth to the EBS store. Moreover, since the attack was against EBS and not EC2, I'm not sure that you could actually get any monitoring in place on the volume.
I'm kind of surprised your first assumption is that they have no monitoring in place. I like BitBucket, so I'm biased, but I can't really see anything about this instance that would make assume it was caused by some sort of incompetence on their part.
- bcl 17y agoSorry, I'm not familiar with how EBS connects to the EC2 instances so I assumed the incoming traffic was hitting their EC2 instance. Are you are saying that EBS is accessible from outside and that the attackers were able to discover its IP and attack it directly? This doesn't seem like a very safe way to configure things. I also wonder why Amazon didn't notice this with any of their monitoring of either traffic or system performance and latency. Assuming they have such monitoring in place of course.