The Wicked Twisted Road (talk | contribs) →British: comment |
→DDOS: my 2c |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
::From a single source? Then, it is not a _Distributed_ Denial of Service. [[User:Emijrp|emijrp]] ([[User talk:Emijrp|talk]]) 21:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC) |
::From a single source? Then, it is not a _Distributed_ Denial of Service. [[User:Emijrp|emijrp]] ([[User talk:Emijrp|talk]]) 21:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::I presume they meant someone running a botnet or something. (Not that I have any idea how they know that.) You're right a single source is not a DDOS, and a non-distributed DOS generally doesn't work anyway since it's trivial to block or take down one IP. I would still like more details on why Wikileaks believes this to be a DDOS but I guess that will just have to wait (stupid sources which say it's a 'hack' don't help). [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 21:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC) |
:::I presume they meant someone running a botnet or something. (Not that I have any idea how they know that.) You're right a single source is not a DDOS, and a non-distributed DOS generally doesn't work anyway since it's trivial to block or take down one IP. I would still like more details on why Wikileaks believes this to be a DDOS but I guess that will just have to wait (stupid sources which say it's a 'hack' don't help). [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 21:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
Don't even know how significant the DDOS was. When I saw it on Twitter, I tried accessing wikileaks.org (somewhat contributing to the problem, I suppose) and didn't get an answer. Here's the thing: Wikileaks says, via Twitter, that they're being hit by a DDOS. Fine. The news then reports this. Fine. I try accessing wikileaks.org again. Fine. No, seriously, I got in without a problem, maybe 10 minutes after I'd last checked. Whatever it was, it didn't last long. I think the coverage over the DDOS has been hugely overblock since the media just doesn't understand how a DDoS could affect something like Wikileaks (and it's the media calling it a "hack"). What part of wikileaks was subject to a DDOS? What does a DDoS even mean to an organization like WikiLeaks? |
|||
My point is that this is maybe not such a huge issue deserving of so much speculation or coverage. Maybe. [[User:Xavexgoem|Xavexgoem]] ([[User talk:Xavexgoem|talk]]) 22:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==British== |
==British== |
Revision as of 22:53, 28 November 2010
Journalism Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
International relations Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
DDOS
Has anyone seen any source discuss the possibility this alleged DDOS is really just a lot of real people hammering wikileaks because of reading about this upcoming leak? Nil Einne (talk) 20:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- No, but I was on /b/ a little while before, and there was a lot of speculation there about it being from a single source. It didn't seem like it was them - Amog | Talk • contribs 20:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- From a single source? Then, it is not a _Distributed_ Denial of Service. emijrp (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- I presume they meant someone running a botnet or something. (Not that I have any idea how they know that.) You're right a single source is not a DDOS, and a non-distributed DOS generally doesn't work anyway since it's trivial to block or take down one IP. I would still like more details on why Wikileaks believes this to be a DDOS but I guess that will just have to wait (stupid sources which say it's a 'hack' don't help). Nil Einne (talk) 21:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- From a single source? Then, it is not a _Distributed_ Denial of Service. emijrp (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Don't even know how significant the DDOS was. When I saw it on Twitter, I tried accessing wikileaks.org (somewhat contributing to the problem, I suppose) and didn't get an answer. Here's the thing: Wikileaks says, via Twitter, that they're being hit by a DDOS. Fine. The news then reports this. Fine. I try accessing wikileaks.org again. Fine. No, seriously, I got in without a problem, maybe 10 minutes after I'd last checked. Whatever it was, it didn't last long. I think the coverage over the DDOS has been hugely overblock since the media just doesn't understand how a DDoS could affect something like Wikileaks (and it's the media calling it a "hack"). What part of wikileaks was subject to a DDOS? What does a DDoS even mean to an organization like WikiLeaks?
My point is that this is maybe not such a huge issue deserving of so much speculation or coverage. Maybe. Xavexgoem (talk) 22:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
British
The links regarding criticism of the British action in Afghanistan and the actions of its royal family reveal very little information. Does anyone have any better links as to what was actually said? -- jfry3 (talk) 21:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)