Inside the Attack that Crippled Revision3

[ronxo]

If you're curious about the issues we ran into over this past weekend, please check out Jim's latest blog post (http://revision3.com/blog/2008/05/29/inside-the-attack-that-crippled-revision3) that goes into detail about the site problems and the DoS attack.

[c4st]

Digg it http://digg.com/tech_news/MediaDefender_at_it_Again_DoS_d_Revision_3

[tokenuser]

Here (http://revision3.com/blog/2008/05/29/inside-the-attack-that-crippled-revision3) is what happened over the memorial day weekend... :(
Digg (http://digg.com/security/Inside_the_Attack_that_Crippled_Revision3_3) the story and let the world know.

-chuckles-

Or you could digg the one previously submitted by Revision3 so that the story gets the attention it deserves, instead of being dilluted by people jumping on the bandwagon with their own digg submissions.

[veronicazilla]

Or you could digg the one previously submitted by Revision3 so that the story gets the attention it deserves, instead of being dilluted by people jumping on the bandwagon with their own digg submissions.

Here is the Digg link you seek:
http://digg.com/security/Inside_the_Attack_that_Crippled_Revision3_3

[tokenuser]

Here is the Digg link you seek:
http://digg.com/security/Inside_the_Attack_that_Crippled_Revision3_3The chuckles submission is http://digg.com/security/Inside_the_Attack_that_Crippled_Revision3_3 and currently has the most diggs.

All submitted within a minute of each other, so calling a dupe is bogus in this case ... but I would prefer to see all the focus on a single digg so that it hits the front page and stays there instead of being dilluted among the "OMG Lindsay Lohan to Marry Her Gay BFF" and "FF3 RC3 alpha build 1902 release for Ubuntu Puzzled Chipmunk [PICS]" submissions :)

[deviationer]

wow...

I hope the federal government does something against them.

[veronicazilla]

The chuckles submission is http://digg.com/security/Inside_the_Attack_that_Crippled_Revision3_3 and currently has the most diggs.

All submitted within a minute of each other, so calling a dupe is bogus in this case ... but I would prefer to see all the focus on a single digg so that it hits the front page and stays there instead of being dilluted among the "OMG Lindsay Lohan to Marry Her Gay BFF" and "FF3 RC3 alpha build 1902 release for Ubuntu Puzzled Chipmunk [PICS]" submissions :)

Yes, that is the one I posted.

[rowlodge]

read it, "very interesting"

[comhcinc]

do i smell lawsuit? yes, yes i do.

[tokenuser]

Yes, that is the one I posted.I swear you posted the _2 link ... sorry about incorrectly correcting you.

[xibalba]

Sue!

I swear you posted the _2 link ... sorry about incorrectly correcting you.

Her post was edited so maybe she did and fixed it. :p

[skyz]

do i smell lawsuit? yes, yes i do.

cosmic capital :cool:

[comhcinc]

cosmic capital :cool:
what i would do is sue the company and use the money to give a bonus to everyone that works for Rev3.

[masherscf]

what i would do is sue the company and use the money to give a bonus to everyone that works for Rev3.

Donate it to the EFF.

[comhcinc]

Donate it to the EFF.
i am not really a fan of the EFF.

[skyz]

what i would do is sue the company and use the money to give a bonus to everyone that works for Rev3.

i'd split it between bonuses and expansion costs

that way they develop the company without giving any more % away and with no interest payments (if they used loans)

you always have to grow the business into the future in order for all the employees to continue benefiting

sometimes good fortune comes hidden in what seems bad

in adversity is opportunity

[delrio]

I'm all for ensuring that music is legally required, but this is beyond ridiculous. It's stuff like this that keeps me from taking anti-piracy seriously.

[lamon]

I am so ticked about this
I hope you sue them out of business after they get screwed over by the FBI

[victor_c26]

Donate it to the EFF.

Or give the IT crew some of that. By what I read, it seems like they were working throughout Labor day weekend because of this fiasco.

[comhcinc]

Or give the IT crew some of that. By what I read, it seems like they were working throughout Labor day weekend because of this fiasco.
labor day? it's been going on that long!

[highlanderjames]

I think Jim should make Media Defender pay the wages for all the hours the staff had to put in to bring rev3 back up and running. All the man hours spent working on the servers and time spent getting things running again they should pay for.

[darknessgp]

I think Jim should make Media Defender pay the wages for all the hours the staff had to put in to bring rev3 back up and running. All the man hours spent working on the servers and time spent getting things running again they should pay for.

Sorry, the below isn't directed at you. It's just my rant on the subject...

I disagree, they should pay more than that and should face criminal charges. They shut down a place of business for days using an illegal method. Like Jim said in his post, what if it was a hospital? Hell, what if it was Blizzard? I'm sure Vivendi would be throw all kind of legal suits there way. They target trackers, because most of them are not owned by companies and in no way could even consider a legal battle or getting someone like the FBI involved. But Revision3 is a legitimate company that for whatever reason got taken down illegally by another company. There is no case where Media Defender was doing anything even close to right thing or even reasonable. I work at a company that offers hosting for our clients, if some of them were down for a few days that could result in hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenue.

[highlanderjames]

I agree about your venting. What it if was a news website or a feed in a crisis? That coulda cost lives.

[skyz]

Sorry, the below isn't directed at you. It's just my rant on the subject...

I disagree, they should pay more than that and should face criminal charges. They shut down a place of business for days using an illegal method. Like Jim said in his post, what if it was a hospital? Hell, what if it was Blizzard? I'm sure Vivendi would be throw all kind of legal suits there way. They target trackers, because most of them are not owned by companies and in no way could even consider a legal battle or getting someone like the FBI involved. But Revision3 is a legitimate company that for whatever reason got taken down illegally by another company. There is no case where Media Defender was doing anything even close to right thing or even reasonable. I work at a company that offers hosting for our clients, if some of them were down for a few days that could result in hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenue.

as well as damage to the brand

though many viewers are extremely loyal a casual visitor in the time period would have drawn the conclusion that revision 3 was not all that and ...

that is damage to the I/A of the company

[masherscf]

Or give the IT crew some of that. By what I read, it seems like they were working throughout Labor day weekend because of this fiasco.


Um, Memorial Day...

[joey85]

I also hope that Revision3 presses charges/sues them.

While I do think that this was indeed an accident, if you are driving your car and cause a wreck, it is still your responsibility to pay for the damages.

Secondly, I think that their data provider/ISPs should look into what kind of activity MediaDefender is up to. With the bandwidth and power of a mid sized datacenter (9Gbit/2000 Servers) 'accidents' shouldn't be allowed to happen when that kind of force is directed to one point. Like Jim said, what happens when they accidentally attack a critical company? IE Cell phone providers, hospitals, etc...

[kilroyperrywinkle]

So whats going on with this? Any thing new? Are we (I like to think of company as ours even though I don't work there) suing or what?

[ice-cream]

Jim, Marty, and Patrick are all going to be on TWiT tomorrow to discuss the attack, according to Leo's twitter.

http://twitter.com/leolaporte/statuses/824000164

[comhcinc]

So whats going on with this? Any thing new? Are we (I like to think of company as ours even though I don't work there) suing or what?

give them some time. it's been less than a week. you kids with your 24 hour news cycles:rolleyes:

[bluepanda]

I disagree, they should pay more than that and should face criminal charges.

I agree with you whole heartedly. Every single employee who knew how their operations worked should be made example of. From the CEO (well CTO probably) to the coder who set the system up. They have been running a system that attacks what is a brilliant content distribution method without due process or any regard for our legal system. And profiting from it.

Hell it is through mediadefender that Hollywood is (illegally) attempting to stop what is a revolution in content distribution. What is the only challenge to their bland and over priced central media system. While ignoring and imo attempting to make people think their media distribution model is the only way forward. Something revision3 clearly shows is incorrect.

So please Revision3 sue the hell out of them and make sure the FBI does not stop till they all end up as the latest toys in our prison systems shower rooms. No out of court settlements with gag requirements please. :cool:

Edit: sorry for my first post being such a rant. This might be something I feel strongly about. :-P

[comhcinc]

you people should really learn the law before you rant. it just makes you look dumb. no one is going to go to prison over this. even if you could get prison time (which i doubt) then the person will be put on probation and fine.

and why should the average guy who is working for mediadenfender be sent to prison? he/she was just doing thier job. it's the people that make the policies who are responbile

[shinigami052]

Okay one thing I've been thinking about what Media Defender is doing is how can they catch people downloading illegal stuff like this?

Here's what I'm thinking. If they are putting up the copyrighted materials first of all, itsn't it in some way entrapment? Second if they have the permission from the MPAA and RIAA to put up these torrents doesn't that mean they're giving others permission to download it? The whole make available arguement that the MPAA and RIAA have been using to sue people comes back to bit them in the ass right here.

If I own content and I put it up in a torrent, I'm knowingly allowing people to download it. Just by putting up these files, I'm making my content available and saying that it's okay to download it. Isn't that basically what the MPAA and RIAA are doing via Media Defender?

My ideas aren't completely formed yet but I'm just brainstroming here because something just doesn't seem right to me.

[tokenuser]

Okay one thing I've been thinking about what Media Defender is doing is how can they catch people downloading illegal stuff like this?

Here's what I'm thinking. If they are putting up the copyrighted materials first of all, itsn't it in some way entrapment? Second if they have the permission from the MPAA and RIAA to put up these torrents doesn't that mean they're giving others permission to download it? Media Defender dont' put up legitimate torrents though. They put up bogus files or corrupted versions of the original files. So, they aren't really distributing anything of any value.

Yes - it is kinda sorta entrapment. In internet security, it is a called a "honeypot", and falls into a grey area legally. It is like the pedophiles they trap on TV - are they breaking the law because they thought they were talking to a 13 yo girl, when she was in fact a 48 yo policeman? Similarly, are you breaking the law if you download a file that is intentioanlly corrupted/crippled? In each case, no law was broken per se, but you went out with intent to break the law ... and that is a much weaker case.

[shinigami052]

Media Defender dont' put up legitimate torrents though. They put up bogus files or corrupted versions of the original files. So, they aren't really distributing anything of any value.

Yes - it is kinda sorta entrapment. In internet security, it is a called a "honeypot", and falls into a grey area legally. It is like the pedophiles they trap on TV - are they breaking the law because they thought they were talking to a 13 yo girl, when she was in fact a 48 yo policeman? Similarly, are you breaking the law if you download a file that is intentioanlly corrupted/crippled? In each case, no law was broken per se, but you went out with intent to break the law ... and that is a much weaker case.

Yeah that just doesn't make sense. If they're not even putting up real files, what if you're downloading the file knowing it isn't the movie? Also I don't know how this doesn't fall into the Fair Use Act. What if you're downloading the movie to view it and review the film or even merely to review the file itself. The Fair Use Act lets you keep and use copyrighted materials for up to a certain amount of time (24hrs i think) for the purposes of review, research or (something else).

I think what these companies are doing is in such a legal gray and the old timers in the judging position don't know what's going on that they're winning due only to the fact that they're got better lawyers and not due to the fact that they're right.

[comhcinc]

honey pots have been around forever and predate the interwebz. it's not really that grey of an area. you go to buy pot for some one and it turns out to be a cop. you are still guilty. you searched out the pot. same with this if you weren't trying to illegal download these movies, music whatever. then you wouldn't have nothing to worry about.

fair use? wtf? are you saying that you are allow to walk in to a video store and take what ever movie you want to review it as long as you return in it a day?

the only grey area is that mediadefender was using rev3 torrents. i don't see that as a grey area at all. that is against the law.

it's not what mediadefender did. it's how they did it.

[shinigami052]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

if you were making a video retort to a movie and wanted to use clips from it, AFAIK you can use them citing the Fair Use act.

[comhcinc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

if you were making a video retort to a movie and wanted to use clips from it, AFAIK you can use them citing the Fair Use act.
i know that, BUT you would still have to obtain a copy of that movie via LEGAL means. you are not protected at all when you download an illegal torrent.

[bluepanda]

you people should really learn the law before you rant. it just makes you look dumb. no one is going to go to prison over this. even if you could get prison time (which i doubt) then the person will be put on probation and fine.

and why should the average guy who is working for mediadenfender be sent to prison? he/she was just doing thier job. it's the people that make the policies who are responbile

No offense but at least where I live DDOS attacks are illegal. Those perpetrating them are criminals. Media defender clearly has an automated system to use such an attack in certain situations, making part of its operations illegal.

This has to be illegal. Therefore from those who's idea the system was, through those who implemented it right down to the guys who watches over the servers at night have committed a criminal act, conspired to commit such an act, or at the very least is an accessory to said act.

They all should feel the full force of the law. Perhaps prison time isn't likely but it would be something id like to see. These people stand all high and mighty saying they are fighting criminals but really they are vigilantes (which might i add is illegal) who just hurt an innocent bystander (revision3).

Finally your point that the average joe shouldn't be held responsible is laughable. If a mature adult (no matter how average) helps commit a crime no matter what they were told to do by someone else they are still criminals, still hold responsibly and should be punished accordingly.

The fact that this company is employed by some of the largest media corporations in the world means it should be made an example of and all those who dare to help it.

[esophagus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

if you were making a video retort to a movie and wanted to use clips from it, AFAIK you can use them citing the Fair Use act.Psst. That isn't what Fair Use is. Just look at the title. It means you can use things, in a fair manner. Stealing (whether you feel pirating is morally stealing or not is irrelevant, its the law and that is what sticks in an argument like this) violates that "fair" bit entirely, and a movie review (as you said in your previous post) violates the "use" bit.

Even if this was at all what Fair Use was, it rarely holds up in court.

[esophagus]

No offense but at least where I live DDOS attacks are illegal. Those perpetrating them are criminals. Media defender clearly has an automated system to use such an attack in certain situations, making part of its operations illegal.

This has to be illegal.This is illegal. Comhcinc is just saying he doesn't think this is something anyone will get jailtime for. The FBI are involved, at this point no one can rationally try and say nothing illegal happened.
Therefore from those who's idea the system was, through those who implemented it right down to the guys who watches over the servers at night have committed a criminal act, conspired to commit such an act, or at the very least is an accessory to said act.

They all should feel the full force of the law. Perhaps prison time isn't likely but it would be something id like to see. These people stand all high and mighty saying they are fighting criminals but really they are vigilantes (which might i add is illegal) who just hurt an innocent bystander (revision3).

Finally your point that the average joe shouldn't be held responsible is laughable. If a mature adult (no matter how average) helps commit a crime no matter what they were told to do by someone else they are still criminals, still hold responsibly and should be punished accordingly.

The fact that this company is employed by some of the largest media corporations in the world means it should be made an example of and all those who dare to help it.The problem is that what they do regularly isn't a crime. As has been stated, what MediaDefender does regularly is nothing but a Honeypot scam, which is legal. Anyone in on whatever happened to Revision3 should be prosecuted, so long as they commited the crime. The rest did nothing. That's just like hating America because Bush is an idiot. Or hating the Revision3 forums because ICE CREAM is an idiot.

[computoman]

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. There also can be different levels of culpability. I do not know the details of the ddos attack, but I would let the feds do their job in fact finding before making any accusations. I do hope that justice is served.

Time heals all wounds and time wounds all heels.

[jimmiesatx]

i smell a lawsuit coming.

[tokenuser]

i smell a lawsuit coming.You need to blow your nose. JLo said on TWiT that there will be no lawsuit. That might not stop the feds from pressing charges, but the lawsuit will not be coming from Rev3.

[moneyman1978]

First off i would like to say what Media Defender does is complete and utter B.S. I used to work in the Data center for the company that hosts their hardware. They are one of the companies biggest clients. Before Media Defender moved in it was quiet and slow for me working Grave yard. But after they moved in i would get constant calls and e-mail from people who said we were DOS attacking them. I would have to do some searching to figure out whether or not it was a rogue client of ours and most times it pointed to Media Defender. Not being a network guy there and just being a NOC tech i asked the Jr Network admin and he said yeah they knew that they did that but basically if they were not breaking the law then it was all good. Then when my manager had me deal with the complaints i saw that all of the DOS attack complaints were all being forwarded to us but the ips were actually owned by Media Defender. I recently saw a spammer get kicked out of that data center for spamming but these guys are not even answering to anything. Its amazing. Anways the old company io worked for knows about this. Good ol Net2EZ and the network Admin Daniel knows whats going on whether its legal or not beats me but Media Defender is still in Colo2 doing their thing with multiple fiber in and out and being jerks for no reason. Please prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

[computoman]

Interesting page

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/29/2026213&from=rss

[highlanderjames]

After talking with my father about what happened. He was a General Manager of things like Sears,Payless,Food Giant and others for 53 years. He explained a few things to me. Media Defender is liable for damages of lost time,the wages of those who worked to get Rev3 back up and running. And for the sponsors lost possible sales and advertising.Its not right that Rev 3 and the show sponsors have to take in the shorts because of Media Defender.I know by reading the posts 99.99999% of the fans would stand behind rev3 if they desired to go after Media Defender.