Pledge for new beginning

[messiah_b]

Originally Posted by Dijalin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And knowing these assholes would face federal prison time for being idiots would be good enough for me.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[magic]

Originally Posted by Dijalin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A crime is a crime, you don't need a lawyer, they need a lawyer, you would only need a lawyer if you wanted money out of it.

And knowing these assholes would face federal prison time for being idiots would be good enough for me.

i'd be in prison for about 28937492837423894 years if the federal government gave two shits about "cyber terrorism" take a chill pill brosiff the server will be back shortly...

[messiah_b]

Originally Posted by Dijalin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Doesn't this fall under cyber terrorism and if committed in the US, considered a federal felony?

Yes someone call DHS. I'm sure they will put Steven Segal on the case.

[Sloth]

haha yea what a pathetic dork lol

[Lance]

I'm sure this is making them lol irl too man.

[Zarniwooop]

Doesn't help us in any way.

The devs/project manager need to decide if/how/where/when.

They probably have a lot of questions to ask first.

[Falisaty]

Denial-of-service attacks are considered violations of the IAB's Internet proper use policy, and also violate the acceptable use policies of virtually all Internet Service Providers. They also commonly constitute violations of the laws of individual nations.

[Tovok]

Here's some info:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk59...80174a5b.shtml

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/coll...ite_Paper.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...t_DDoS_attacks

Generally, defending against a DDoS would be something the ISP does at least some of the heavy lifting for, I would think.

[Halladar]

Tovok put some links to it on the previous page. As I understand it, you basically put demands on the servers resources through various means (discussed in the wiki entry most briefly).

The resource in this case was bandwidth. The hoster dropped this server because the fact that someone had it in for the server affected their normal operations. The hoster is apparently not equipped to handle something like this, and a hoster that could is much more expensive.

Basically that is what I have gathered. In addition it is very difficult to determine who launched the attack. I also think it would be very difficult to get this prosecuted depending on who and where the attack came from.

That is what I have gathered.

[Cribanox]

You would totally start over again don't lie =)