& according to https://www.comparitech.com/blog/information-security/ddos-s... their frequency isn't declining
But yes, the larger sites have gotten their shit together so that the cost to DDoS has gone up
Also if you have a botnet you now have to ask: do you want rent out DDoS or do you want to mine crypto?
The best I could find was 250 a day using only 15,000 hosts. Not bad considering the cost is literally zero for the attackers. Scale that up to half a million hosts, which is a tiny botnet in reality would make 8000+ a day or over 3 million a year based on low hanging fruit
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/thousands-of-iot-devices-can...
For example, in a Smurf attack the attacker finds broadcast IP addresses by sending an ICMP request to an address and counts the number of ICMP replies that come back. A broadcast IP address is one that sends a packet to every host on a network (often with 255 as the last octet like 207.103.0.255 for a Class C network of 207.103.0.0/24).
After finding suitably large networks with an open broadcast IP address they then send the broadcast IP address packets with a spoof IP address of the victim. The attack is then multiplied by however many hosts are on the broadcast IP address network.
DNS reflection is another type of DDoS attack that also relies on the ability to spoof an IP address of the victim.
The more interesting/difficult to mitigate attacks are those that complete handshakes (if TCP) and make fully formed requests at L7 that otherwise appear legitimate.
A bit speculative, but my hunch is --
IOT and some other advancements still create opportunities for new DDoS attacks, but attackers herd. And the "X as a service" support infrastructure is mostly supporting ransomware right now, likely because its safer and more lucrative. You can walk away from a ransomware target, fire and forget, so you can do it at scale. DDoS you have to pick your victims, and monitor and maintain the pressure, choose how to allocate your resources to targets while they're investigating or waiting you out.
Cloudflare might be part of the story, maybe that was enough of a headwind to stop the trolls, but for the professional criminals, I suspect this is about lucrative alternative attacks.
100gbps is basically trivial test for a new botnet
Additionally, depending on the exact service, you can certainly firewall traffic - close to the source.
The specific problem here is that mail servers, since that is not the target of DDoS until now, which means that there are few companies who do provide mail exchange-specific DDoS protection, which means larger companies (Verizon/Yahoo, Microsoft/Outlook, Google/Gmail) just operate servers well beyond what they really need, and I don't think that they can just run to Cloudflare and violate their privacy promise in the process.
Put that with the change to more people being mobile-only and there's fewer ways to create the botnets behind these.
From the ISP's point of view, you might have prevented an overload that could have affected other customers. From the customer's point of view, their service was denied all the same. Doesn't sound like anything has improved compared to 10-20 years ago.
Better to have the target blackholed upstream. Can usually be done with a BGP community of 666 if your peers support it.
Interesting, I think of TPM as being for holding keys for bitlocker encryption or personal certificates. Can you clarify how TPM makes it harder for to remotely take over a computer?
Source: Security Engineering by Ross Anderson.
Might want to check how much it costs to increase someone's billing 20k a day (granted, a botnet makes it cheaper, but measure opportunity cost of what else that botnet could be doing), see also https://www.reddit.com/r/aws/comments/7z6uc3/comment/dutgw6u...
Full disclosure: I work for Azure