• iltg@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      thanks for saying this! i really don’t want to victim blame itsfoss for getting traffic spikes but if you cant handle ~20MB in one minute (~400kbps) of traffic you’re doing something really really wrong and you really should look into it, especially if you want to distribute content. crying “dont share our links on mastodon” also sounds like hunting windmills, block the mastodon UA and be done with it, or stop putting images in your link previews for mastodon, or drop link previews completely. a “100 mb DDOS” is laughable at best, nice amplification calculation but that’s still 100 megs

        • chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          AWS charges $0.09/GB. Even assuming zero caching and always dynamically requested content, you’d need 100x this “attack” to rack up $1 in bandwidth fees. There are way faster ways to rack up bandwidth fees. I remember the days where I paid $1/GB of egress on overage, and even then, this 100MB would’ve only set me back $0.15 at worst.

          Also worth noting that those who’d host on AWS isn’t going to blink at $1 in bandwidth fees; they’d be hosting else where that offers cheaper egress (I.e. billed by megabits or some generous fixed allocation); those that are more sane would be serving behind CDNs that’d be even cheaper.

          This is a non-issue written by someone who clearly doesn’t know what they’re talking about, likely intended to drum up traffic to their site.

          • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Admittedly, the 100MB isn’t that bad, though at 100MB per post with several posts per day such a website does need to deal well with caching. I certainly would take my blog down if every time I posted something I needed to pay 15 cents for the privilege on top of my existing hosting costs.

            However, an orchestrated attack could do thousands times more damage. A small group of Japanese middle schoolers managed to overwhelm all moderation tools the Fediverse had available to them with a quick script, and that attack only stopped because the police got involved. I can think of several ways to abuse the presumptions of friendliness that’s present within most Fediverse software.

            Having 18000 servers download a couple hundred pages per hour is enough to take down most small websites, especially thanks to the geographically distributed nature of the Fediverse that requires every CDN node to be fully populated (and likely populated with spam), and that’s not hard to pull off with a handful of small domains and maybe a couple of Amazon IP addresses.

            I’m not so worried about the traffic caused accidentally (though there is a separate thundering horde problem with many ActivityPub implementations) but the potential for abuse is there and it needs to be solved before it someone malicious finds out.

            • chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Fortunately, you’d be very hard pressed to find bandwidth pricing from 18 years ago.

              The point is the claimed issue is really a non issue, and there are much more effective ways to stress websites without needing the intermediary of fediverse.