Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Attacks/Breaches

2/21/2020
02:00 PM
100%
0%

California Man Arrested for Politically Motivated DDoS

The distributed denial-of-service attacks took a congressional candidate's website offline for a total of 21 hours during the campaign for office.

A man in Santa Monica, Calif., has been arrested for launching a series of attacks on the website of a California congressional candidate. Arthur Jan Dam is charged with one federal count of  intentionally damaging and attempting to damage a protected computer.

According to the arrest affidavit, Dam was responsible for four distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on the candidates' Web server, taking the site offline for a total of 21 hours during the campaign in 2018. Dam, it was noted, was married to an employee of the candidate's rival for the office.

All of the attacks originated from a single Amazon Web Server account owned by Dam and were controlled by logins originating from either his residence or workplace.

Read more here.

Check out The Edge, Dark Reading's new section for features, threat data, and in-depth perspectives. Today's featured story: "10 Tough Questions CEOs Are Asking CISOs."

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
boholuxe
50%
50%
boholuxe,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/27/2020 | 3:15:45 PM
one IP?
Attack from one IP is not DDOS attack. Such attacks should be easily blocked on server by a simple server configuration
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
2/27/2020 | 1:59:19 PM
Re: DoS not DDoS
This article is a snippet of a more comprehensive article. But the point the original comment was trying to make was that if the attack came from a single system it would be DoS and not DDoS which they are correct based on the information that is provided.

Distributed refers to an attack from many separate systems. A many to one methodology, where DoS can still come from one system using a variety of methods but the term DDoS is constantly used as a misnomer for everything DoS related. And that's basically what the commentor was calling out.

I go into more detail in another response as to my position on the attack, maybe trying to have the article save face but without reviewing the details extensively and just looking at what is provided they are definitely correct in their assessment.

And welcome to Cyber Security. It's an interesting field.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
2/27/2020 | 1:54:58 PM
Re: DoS not DDoS
It could have originated from a single AWS server but most likely this server leveraged a zombie network to distribute the attack. I would have to dive further into the logisitics but it seems implausible that a single server would be effective at a DoS attack even using a very effective method like reflective DNS for 4 separate campaigns.

That's just my guess. I would have to see if that level of detail has been revealed.

But I definitely understand your point.
Red444
50%
50%
Red444,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/26/2020 | 11:19:54 AM
Re: DoS not DDoS
I'm sorry, but why? 

I'm still learning cyber security... 
CyberInstructor
50%
50%
CyberInstructor,
User Rank: Strategist
2/24/2020 | 10:23:07 AM
"Here's your stupid sign!"
Comment for the older generation folks:  this is definitely a case of "here's your stupid sign."  
Marc Kranat
100%
0%
Marc Kranat,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/23/2020 | 8:58:45 PM
DoS not DDoS
It's not distributed, the original article said the attack all originated from one server, so a DoS attack.

Why they would have so much trouble and it took so much time blocking an attack from a single IP is a bit of a surprise.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/28/2020
Stay-at-Home Orders Coincide With Massive DNS Surge
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  5/27/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Can you smell me now?
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-11844
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-29
There is an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in Micro Focus Service Management Automation (SMA) product affecting version 2018.05 to 2020.02. The vulnerability could be exploited to provide unauthorized access to the Container Deployment Foundation.
CVE-2020-6937
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-29
A Denial of Service vulnerability in MuleSoft Mule CE/EE 3.8.x, 3.9.x, and 4.x released before April 7, 2020, could allow remote attackers to submit data which can lead to resource exhaustion.
CVE-2020-7648
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-29
All versions of snyk-broker before 4.72.2 are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Read. It allows arbitrary file reads for users who have access to Snyk's internal network by appending the URL with a fragment identifier and a whitelisted path e.g. `#package.json`
CVE-2020-7650
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-29
All versions of snyk-broker after 4.72.0 including and before 4.73.1 are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Read. It allows arbitrary file reads to users with access to Snyk's internal network of any files ending in the following extensions: yaml, yml or json.
CVE-2020-7654
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-29
All versions of snyk-broker before 4.73.1 are vulnerable to Information Exposure. It logs private keys if logging level is set to DEBUG.