What is the biggest attack in GBPS you stopped
-
That is an unorthodox way of arguing, Supermule; proving an item's inadequacies by proving your inability to skillfully operate said <thing>(pfSense, Linux, Ford F150, shovels, pants, etc). To continually defend your stance, it is in your self-interest to not only stay ignorant, but perhaps even choose to learn exclusively the wrong ways of using <thing>. The worse your skills become with <thing>only validates your stand-point more and more. A strange way to prove a point… ;)
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?</thing></thing></thing>
-
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?
From what i have been told the 40gbps from multiple peerings arrives at 2 redundant cisco where i can connect in 10gbps ports ( 2 ports in bonding here) so i can filter there , normaly the main routers go in 20gbps to the rooms routers.
So i would playing the role the room routers for my ip's with my filtering box and from there go to my rack probably in bridging mode. Of course the fact that i have basic knowledge of networking but not advanced ones limit my possibilities. -
@ghislain26:
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?
From what i have been told the 40gbps from multiple peerings arrives at 2 redundant cisco where i can connect in 10gbps ports ( 2 ports in bonding here) so i can filter there , normaly the main routers go in 20gbps to the rooms routers.
So i would playing the role the room routers for my ip's with my filtering box and from there go to my rack probably in bridging mode. Of course the fact that i have basic knowledge of networking but not advanced ones limit my possibilities.Do you have plenty of logs during the DDoS so that you can figure out what the first hints will be that the attack is beginning? Did they use just 1 type of attack, or did they use multiple? Did you get multiple types of DDoS simultaneously, or did the attacks come in coordinated waves? Did a magority of the IPs from a common area that you can set an alias for?
-
The attack we faced was from 2gbps to 6.5 gbps of smal udp packets flood on random ports (the destination ports changed every 10 minutes or so from what i gathered) . The ip were numerous and from india and china, probably some botnet or simply spoofed but i beleive it was a botnet.
I do not have trace or evidence as i had no filtering device and when the attacks where "on" i was unable to reach the server until they nullrouted my ip at the data center so.. I poke around to see if i can build up some protection even if i know a flood bigger than 15gbps will probably make me nullrouted anyway i want to provide minimum resistance to the lesser flood one and not be killed by one person with 2 servers flooding a 1gbps port.
-
@ghislain26:
The attack we faced was from 2gbps to 6.5 gbps of smal udp packets flood on random ports (the destination ports changed every 10 minutes or so from what i gathered) . The ip were numerous and from india and china, probably some botnet or simply spoofed but i beleive it was a botnet.
I do not have trace or evidence as i had no filtering device and when the attacks where "on" i was unable to reach the server until they nullrouted my ip at the data center so.. I poke around to see if i can build up some protection even if i know a flood bigger than 15gbps will probably make me nullrouted anyway i want to provide minimum resistance to the lesser flood one and not be killed by one person with 2 servers flooding a 1gbps port.
And there is nothing the datacenter where your rack is in can do for you? How do they nullroute
the traffic for you? Why they can´t offering you something to protect you from that DDoS attacks?
Would be interesting to know if the are not offering such a service as an option on top of their service!edit: I found something that would be placed between the both routers at the WAN interfaces and the
firewalls later after them in the background, pending on what throughput we are talking about the right
appliance must be chosen. here is a pdf from them about their hardware. -
If you are so smart and "godlike" then pls. post a working config and an IP that I can target.
Then I will prove my point…
When logging, it can be both TCP and UDP. UDP floods tends to be bandwith consuming and TCP are specific protocols and maybe L7 traffic like VSE, RUDY or ARME Scripts...
OVH takes down pfSense at once no matter the bandwith. We have seen as low as 40mbit to make it completely useless and servers are unreachable.
That is an unorthodox way of arguing, Supermule; proving an item's inadequacies by proving your inability to skillfully operate said <thing>(pfSense, Linux, Ford F150, shovels, pants, etc). To continually defend your stance, it is in your self-interest to not only stay ignorant, but perhaps even choose to learn exclusively the wrong ways of using <thing>. The worse your skills become with <thing>only validates your stand-point more and more. A strange way to prove a point… ;)
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?</thing></thing></thing>
-
That is an unorthodox way of arguing, Supermule; proving an item's inadequacies by proving your inability to skillfully operate said <thing>(pfSense, Linux, Ford F150, shovels, pants, etc). To continually defend your stance, it is in your self-interest to not only stay ignorant, but perhaps even choose to learn exclusively the wrong ways of using <thing>. The worse your skills become with <thing>only validates your stand-point more and more. A strange way to prove a point… ;)
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?</thing></thing></thing>
If you are so smart and "godlike" then pls. post a working config and an IP that I can target.
Then I will prove my point…
When logging, it can be both TCP and UDP. UDP floods tends to be bandwith consuming and TCP are specific protocols and maybe L7 traffic like VSE, RUDY or ARME Scripts...
OVH takes down pfSense at once no matter the bandwith. We have seen as low as 40mbit to make it completely useless and servers are unreachable.
Either become part of the solution to your problem, or move on. Perhaps create a thread dedicated to your problem and all the logical steps you have taken to isolate the bug. What led you to suspect that your bug affects all unix-based operating systems?
What sort of things have you already eliminated as potential culprits? Have you already confirmed the cause of your bug?Being light on the details and heavy on the emotion says obvious things about your intent, though… I could be wrong. :)
-
BlueKobold: if i could make the DC make the move for me i would have trust me :p They do not offer ddos mitigation other than nullrouting.the problem is not here to check if another one can do it for me i am sure it would be better to take it where the pipes are the biggest but i cannot. I openned this thread to see if there was some usecase similar to mine willing to share experience on this :)
Supermule: if you agree to that i could send you an ip in private but before i will try to have written permission by the DC just to be sure and prevent any legal issue for anyone :p
Anything that help the thing to move forward is great :) Look forward any other experiences i learn at the same time and educate myself.
-
They do not offer ddos mitigation other than nullrouting.
Ah, ok this was not clear to me!
-
You are.
That is an unorthodox way of arguing, Supermule; proving an item's inadequacies by proving your inability to skillfully operate said <thing>(pfSense, Linux, Ford F150, shovels, pants, etc). To continually defend your stance, it is in your self-interest to not only stay ignorant, but perhaps even choose to learn exclusively the wrong ways of using <thing>. The worse your skills become with <thing>only validates your stand-point more and more. A strange way to prove a point… ;)
ghislain26, you say you can get your device installed earlier in the HOPs? Is this data-center multi-homed?</thing></thing></thing>
If you are so smart and "godlike" then pls. post a working config and an IP that I can target.
Then I will prove my point…
When logging, it can be both TCP and UDP. UDP floods tends to be bandwith consuming and TCP are specific protocols and maybe L7 traffic like VSE, RUDY or ARME Scripts...
OVH takes down pfSense at once no matter the bandwith. We have seen as low as 40mbit to make it completely useless and servers are unreachable.
Either become part of the solution to your problem, or move on. Perhaps create a thread dedicated to your problem and all the logical steps you have taken to isolate the bug. What led you to suspect that your bug affects all unix-based operating systems?
What sort of things have you already eliminated as potential culprits? Have you already confirmed the cause of your bug?Being light on the details and heavy on the emotion says obvious things about your intent, though… I could be wrong. :)
-
I can't believe this thread is on to the second page…
You cannot mitigate a DDoS attack with a single firewall/router. If it was that easy, don't you think Sony, Microsoft and anyone running a cloud service would do it and DDoS would be a thing of the past? If it was that easy, why are there services like CloudFlare that specialize in DDoS protection? Only global traffic inspection & load-balancing will do it for you... if you're willing to pay.
Give up on this notion of blocking DDoS with pfSense.
-
Listen….pfSense replies to specific traffic in a non orderly fashion. It chokes itself...
And yes you can. ASk yourself why people say it cant be done. Because they pay BIG bucks to get protected.....
But in fact they dont. They just get null routed and then wait for services to come back online.
-
Listen….pfSense replies to specific traffic in a non orderly fashion. It chokes itself...
And yes you can. ASk yourself why people say it cant be done. Because they pay BIG bucks to get protected.....
But in fact they dont. They just get null routed and then wait for services to come back online.
Can I see some proof, or must I trust you?
-
And yes you can. ASk yourself why people say it cant be done. Because they pay BIG bucks to get protected…..
But in fact they dont. They just get null routed and then wait for services to come back online.I'm not sure who you're talking to here.
Can I see some proof, or must I trust you?
Heh, give him a public IP of one of your routers and perhaps you may see for yourself…
-
Null routing won't protect you against spoofed source IPs. It's the firewall's job to drop out of state packets, not die. I understand that the fast path is if the state already exists, I understand that running through the rules is not quite as fast as the fast path, but that's not the issue either. The issue is dropped packets are some how the most expensive path of all, to the point that the router dies with only a relatively trickle of them.
Maybe this is more of a FreeBSD issue than PFSense, but it seems to be something misconfigured or a fundamental flaw.
Step 1) See if packet is part of an existing flow, if so pass, else goto step 2
Step 2) Check packet against rules, if passes, create new flow, else goto step 3
Step 3) Drop packet then jump off a cliffStep 3 needs to be fixed to not be so emo.
-
I forgot that this was an issue that only occurred when lots of source IP+ports were used, not that dropping packet is expensive. PFSense handles a single source attempting to DOS, but the exact same attack as a DDOS, even with the same number of PPS, will result in PFSense crapping its pants.
-
@KOM:
You cannot mitigate a DDoS attack with a single firewall/router. If it was that easy, don't you think Sony, Microsoft and anyone running a cloud service would do it and DDoS would be a thing of the past? If it was that easy, why are there services like CloudFlare that specialize in DDoS protection? Only global traffic inspection & load-balancing will do it for you… if you're willing to pay.
i dont think sony was hit by only 6gbps, if i cannot protect me against ALL ddos i should be able to mitigate the lesser one. It's like saying there is no point to lock your door because bank are robbed ?
seems that everybody just say when a teenager get angry he pays 10 buck and boom goes your site, just null route it and wait a week or two and it will be okay or pay 9209318401841$ for a protection service with arbor ?
All i see until now is that nobody seems to use pfsense successfully for somethign bigger than a single Gb or they stay silent :) For now all agree that it (and freeBSD) cannot handle this.
Thanks for all the time you dedicated to answering me, i will continue my journey for a solution (i will continue to monitor the forum about this just in case).
best regards,
Ghislain. -
Stopping someone from entering your home; pfSense can do that.
Stopping someone from picketing your house; pfSense cannot do that (from inside your house). You need to own the entire neighborhood.
I would like to see some examples of someone stopping, or even slightly mitigating, a UDP-based DDoS while only controlling the final hop.
-
seems that everybody just say when a teenager get angry he pays 10 buck and boom goes your site, just null route it and wait a week or two and it will be okay
He don´t must pay anything, he download a software as many others allso and then they are
all attacking your site DoS is not DDoS! 8)or pay 9209318401841$ for a protection service with arbor ?
Dealing with 10 Gbit/s single or multiple time is no child game, this is business like
IT and this was never and will be never a game, journey or something for the "get it cheap"
generation, as I see it right. And if your DC is not able to prevent you from those attacks
will be showing up that this is not one option more to make money but more then spending
much more money then the most customers want to pay for. Because this could be done
it means also not that you are taking much money and solve it out for ever, because the
next DDoS attack could be then hitting you with 65 GBit/s and more sufficient hardware or
will services would be really urgent needed. With the Corero IPS 5500-2400ES you will be
able to protect your server and this was in my eyes the core of your question. For sure those
devices are not to shoot for some bucks at eBay and also not able to collect from the dump
for paying nothing. :DAll i see until now is that nobody seems to use pfsense successfully for somethign bigger than a single Gb or they stay silent :) For now all agree that it (and freeBSD) cannot handle this.
This is really sad in my eyes, only and because your wishes would not be able to solved out, we
are all now the small players in this scene? But I was telling you and by setting up a link something
how we protect our company by using Corero devices, and why we all are now using a single GBit/s
WAN line??? For sure we must pay for that and in this scenario also twice. ;)For now all agree that it (and freeBSD) cannot handle this.
If Lanner gets the FW-8895 working for pfSense and the Tilera packet processing cards will
be able to use, you get a fair change to work it out with OpenDPI, but as I read it between
the lines, it could be then also again very expensive and this is nothing for you and your business
as well you want it getting cheap. Because pfSense is OpenSource and free of cost, that is not
meaning that pfSense is not willing to have a adequate hardware basis to run smooth for the job!Thanks for all the time you dedicated to answering me, i will continue my journey for a solution (i will continue to monitor the forum about this just in case).
Then you can start here in 2012, same question and with the same answers.
Stop 10 Gbps of DDoS? :o -
EXACTLY!
And the funny shit is, that it dies also when changing SYNPROXY state to STATELESS!
What would that tell you??
Whats even funnier is that using OVH scripts and limiting the PPS pr. rule (even the block all rule) doesnt help. You can create an advanced ruleset with 100PPS and it still dies on specific scripts. Then the total bandwith will be very small, but pfSense dies…
Where to look for an error like that? Its buried deep within BSD/Linux.
I revived an old ISA Server 2006 and testet it out front and it wasnt affected when configured.
Null routing won't protect you against spoofed source IPs. It's the firewall's job to drop out of state packets, not die. I understand that the fast path is if the state already exists, I understand that running through the rules is not quite as fast as the fast path, but that's not the issue either. The issue is dropped packets are some how the most expensive path of all, to the point that the router dies with only a relatively trickle of them.
Maybe this is more of a FreeBSD issue than PFSense, but it seems to be something misconfigured or a fundamental flaw.
Step 1) See if packet is part of an existing flow, if so pass, else goto step 2
Step 2) Check packet against rules, if passes, create new flow, else goto step 3
Step 3) Drop packet then jump off a cliffStep 3 needs to be fixed to not be so emo.
