codexon

38 ms·

481.
by codexon 12y ago
Tinc is difficult to setup and uses a custom protocol which may not be thoroughly vetted.
482.
by codexon 13y ago
I have a few issues with OVH. In no particular order: - In summer 2013, they used their customers as beta testers for their anti-ddos service. This was mandatory for ALL customers, there was no way to opt out. This caused false detections o
483.
by codexon 13y ago
Hetzner is really bad. If you get a tiny ddos attack for a few seconds, you'll get null routed for 24 hours. Any longer than that and they'll potentially kick you out. If you've never been ddosed, your really don't have
484.
by codexon 13y ago
Digital Ocean asked for similar verification papers after a couple months of usage. I am also located in the US.
485.
by codexon 13y ago
I ported a python2 app with py2to3 a couple months ago and it wasn't completely painless. The worst problem I ran into was that it didn't know which strings were supposed to be bytes or unicode. And the program would throw a runti
486.
by codexon 13y ago
Does anyone else just see squares instead of whatever unicode symbol it is supposed to be? I'm using Chrome 33.0.1750.117 m
487.
by codexon 13y ago
They have it set to port 80 because they are attacking a service at port 80. If there is a service listening there it will cause the packet buffers to overflow if the server doesn't drain it fast enough long before you flood their band
488.
by codexon 13y ago
No, very few hosts drop them because it costs time and money to do BGP38. I have tested 5+ major hosts spoofing packets to a remote destination and they all allowed spoofing except OVH.
489.
by codexon 13y ago
You can send spoofed packets from nearly every host. However hosts like Ecatel are known to specifically allow their customers to send spoofed packets at full speed 24/7. I think most hosts will notice heavy bandwidth usage, investigat
490.
by codexon 13y ago
The attacks would be a lot smaller and infrequent if cloudflare did not host them. The reason why the DDoS market exploded is because you can now sell your services behind cloudflare for very little cost instead of competitors ddosing each
491.
by codexon 13y ago
The 400 gbps attack on Cloudflare was supposedly launched by this group. https://twitter.com/DerpTrolling
492.
by codexon 13y ago
Because it costs time and money adding ACLs to cheap routers. And also it is impossible to verify someone did it unless you are inside their network.
493.
by codexon 13y ago
Which is the majority of networks. It will never happen, BCP38 is a pipe dream.
494.
by codexon 13y ago
So if you want to set up your own shop you are stuck doing transactions by hand or you have to use a 3rd party like bitpay? Lol. The point of bitcoin is being able to do it yourself and not rely on centralized institutions.
495.
by codexon 13y ago
> "Then should you really be running an exchange handling millions of dollars of transactions?" So what happens to people who aren't running an exchange handling millions of dollars of transactions? It doesn't matter
496.
by codexon 13y ago
This sums up my view on these recent turn of events. I find it quite ridiculous that people are trying to lay the blame on not reading an obscure wiki page. I remember reading much of the bitcoin wiki myself and never seeing ANYTHING about
497.
by codexon 13y ago
The most common attacks we have seen come from DNS, SNMP, and Chargen. You can get up to a 50k byte packet from a 64 byte response, but this is highly variable. SNMP is more prevalent than you might think, it is present and unsecured in man
498.
by codexon 13y ago
1. Because it costs time and money. 2. It doesn't help yourself. So for many companies the cost can't be justified to the shareholders.
499.
by codexon 13y ago
If it isn't such a big deal then why isn't everyone doing it? Most people aren't selling web apps or licenses that you can just revoke after the transaction turns out to be fake. The only way to make transactions faster is a
500.
by codexon 13y ago
"First confirmation is plenty for most transactions, and you're more likely to actually see that money than a credit card transaction (which can be charged back later)." Plenty according to who? Like I said before, don&#x27
501.
by codexon 13y ago
Bitcoin will not change the entire financial world, and I am saying this as someone who owns some and tried using it as an actual currency. - Waiting 1-2 hours for a transaction is unacceptable. Don't tell me about oddballs like Namech
502.
by codexon 13y ago
If I remember correctly there are rootkits that hide in firmware.
503.
by codexon 13y ago
What are the alternatives?
504.
by codexon 13y ago
Gold isn't just shiny, it is the most unreactive metal. It has a lot of other potential uses that other industries avoid because it is so expensive. If the price ever falls it will be kept up by those uses. http://geology.co
505.
by codexon 13y ago
Does anyone else think the 10% fee from bountysource is a bit high?
506.
by codexon 13y ago
While that is true, Bitcoin is far from a bulletproof preserve of wealth. Gold has other uses if it isn't used as a currency anymore. Bitcoin on the other hand can be made completely useless if some critical flaw is found, or the wealt
507.
by codexon 13y ago
That is not true. According to graph at the top of mtgox.com there are about 1000-3000 bitcoins being sold for USD every hour. This volume is huge compared to the volume for euros or any other currency on Mtgox. http://bitcoinity
508.
by codexon 13y ago
It needs to be faster than 1-2 hours for every transaction because the store is waiting for confirmations. When every other normal store only takes a minute to process, 1-2 hours is way too long.
509.
by codexon 13y ago
It is also important to consider DDOS when evaluating protocols. TCP has an advantage over UDP because data cannot be spoofed. There are many ddos protection services that will protect against spoofed TCP connections (SYN floods). Applicati
510.
by codexon 13y ago
No, usually the term I have heard used for this is jitter.

More ›