On Sep 11, 2012, at 17:04 , ryanL <ryan.lan...@gmail.com> wrote: > when patrick is referring to "taking their word for it", he's referring to a > post on outages@ by godaddy's network engineering manager that stated "bgp, > and more details to follow".
Well, mostly I'm taking GoDaddy at their word that this was not a DoS attack. I also believe it was related to BGP, and am happy to get more info. But we are discussing Anonymous vs. Self-inflicted wound here. -- TTFN, patrick > i tend to align with patrick's thought. i'm also interested to see the > details, which they are really under no obligation to provide. > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Rubens Kuhl <rube...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No large flows reported to the affected NSes, tweets were suspicious at > > best, other anon-ops denied the attack was them, and GoDaddy admitted > > internal error. > > > > I'm going to take GoDaddy at their word, and give them major kudos for > > owning up to the mistake - in public. > > That doesn't mean that their description of the internal error fits > what happened. Not to say that there were an attack, just that there > can be more internal failures, including processes, to be accounted > for. Whether they will publish a root-cause analysis/swiss chesse > model/<insert your preferred methodology> or not is up to them, but to > tech-savvy stakeholders I think they are still in debt. > > > Rubens > >
