DoubleClick gets slammed
p2pnet.net News:- Today, ad company DoubleClick, “began to receive a flood of bogus Web page requests, creating a bottleneck that blocked many major sites from displaying ad images,” says a Washington Post story here.
Among the sites hardest hit were those of Nortel Networks, Gateway, MCI, CNN.com and Schwab.com, says the report, continuing that WP readers “also experienced delays accessing pages at washingtonpost.com before The Washington Post Co. blocked DoubleClick’s ads from running on its site”.
Security experts said the DoubleClick attack appears similar to last month’s assault on Akamai Technologies, a company that distributes Web content for such as Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, says the report, adding:
“In that attack, hackers apparently directed tens of thousands of hijacked computers to overwhelm Akamai’s DNS servers, blocking access to many of the company’s customers for nearly two hours. The attack on DoubleClick suggests that hackers are beginning to target key Internet pressure points that – when squeezed – darken the Internet for most users, said Johannes Ullrich, chief technology officer for the SANS Institute’s Internet Storm Center, which monitors hacker activity.
“The hackers don’t need to attack the Internet. If you attack Akamai or DoubleClick you can take out 95 percent of what most people consider to be the Internet,” Ullrich said.
So does the Net really depend utterly on advertising?
July 28th, 2004 at 7:03 pm
It’s a shame that the media still uses the term hacker when they should be using the term cracker.
July 28th, 2004 at 7:20 pm
What a travesty! How will we receive unsolicited marketing messages now!?
July 28th, 2004 at 7:24 pm
DoubleClick deserves it. Bravo.
July 28th, 2004 at 7:27 pm
DoubleClick? Atdmt? commission-junction.com?
DoubleClick.net 127.0.0.4
atdmt.com 127.0.0.4
commission-junction.com 127.0.0.4
Getting the picture? So what if there are some blank spots on the pages.
They slow down surfing anyway. Might as well just blackhole them from the get go.
July 28th, 2004 at 7:28 pm
Good job……….KRACKAS
July 28th, 2004 at 7:35 pm
I always find some spyware from doubleclick when I use spybot or adaware. I hope they get slammed some more, and they should target mainstream media for their white interest ONLY media.
http://www.lemhishoshone.com
July 28th, 2004 at 7:40 pm
it’s sad they had to use hi-jacked computers… i’d gladly donate my 3GHz processor and 2mbit connection to help bring down sites like doubleclick
July 28th, 2004 at 7:53 pm
That is a wonderful idea, why didn’t I think of that?
July 28th, 2004 at 7:56 pm
Check out the free browser from mozilla ( http://www.mozilla.org )
It allows you to optionally not load banner ads and has a preinstalled
popup blocker. Once you load a page, you right click on the banner
and hit the option ‘block images from this server’. It’s a lot less
vulnerable to virii, browser tricks, and worms.
July 28th, 2004 at 8:05 pm
DoubleClick *deserves* it?!!
So you think that if you dislike someone, it’s all right for them to be the target of an illegal attack that shuts down their business?
That’s a form of terrorism, you know.
July 28th, 2004 at 8:07 pm
So you wanna be a terrorist?
I don’t like DoubleClick either — that’s why I use a blocking program. But if we start saying that it’s okay to shut down people we don’t like, that’s a form of terrorism. A mild form, but terrorism, nonetheless.
July 28th, 2004 at 8:13 pm
Terrorism? Whats so terrifying about it?
July 28th, 2004 at 8:14 pm
For those who don’t get it, the 127.0.0.4 is for use in a hosts file. While I’m not the author of that comment, I do endorse it…if that’s what he/she was talking about. Though I would use 127.0.0.1 for standards sake. read up on this at http://www.computing.net/windows95/wwwboard/forum/158896.html
July 28th, 2004 at 8:17 pm
Terrorism:
“The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.” Dictionary.com
Hmm., I looked up the defenition of this work on Dictionary.com when 9/11 occured. This wasn’t what I recall the defenition to be. Time to get out my hardcopy of the dictionary. I thought it had to be related to attacks on foreign governments. Guess not.
July 28th, 2004 at 8:23 pm
hell yeah they deserve it!! spam and spyware distributers deserve everything we can throw at them, and then some… it’s the spyware/spammer losers that are really slowing down our internet. Do you know how many computers i fix every month because of spyware? As far as i’m concerned, spyware is a virus… even antivirus companies are starting to include spyware in their scan databases.
Screw doubleclick! I hope they go out of business and end up living in a cardboard box.
July 28th, 2004 at 8:29 pm
“The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.” – Sounds like DoubleClick is a terrorist!
July 28th, 2004 at 8:36 pm
The obnoxious amounts of internet advertising have never influenced me. That 95% of the internet deserves to taste what it dishes out, which is valueable time wasted wading through counter-productive crap.
July 28th, 2004 at 9:03 pm
That’s awesome
July 28th, 2004 at 9:04 pm
It’s not about slowing down the internet. It’s about doing something about all of the advertising on the internet.
July 28th, 2004 at 9:18 pm
What’s amazing is: the advertising is effective, or DD clients wouldn’t spend their money on it.
Or maybe advertisers think the Net’s like TV and/or radio – like, you see and hear whether you want to or not (unless you have Tivo heh).
Maybe DoubleClick advertisers don’t know significant amounts of their garbage is blocked by one means or another and never sees the light of the internet day.
July 29th, 2004 at 1:40 am
its really unskilled script kiddies….
July 29th, 2004 at 11:56 am
i hoped they hijacked my pc to give them some of their own junk back….
thanks
July 29th, 2004 at 1:28 pm
Come on, doubleCllick is and ad company… ads are the curse of the internet most of the time, not the blessing. Besides that company is known for rather questionable ethics — ins not like the honest guys got slammed. http://www.tomkitta.com
July 29th, 2004 at 3:12 pm
In a day when the Internet is free to all and computer parts are free is when the Internet will not require the use of advertisments.
July 29th, 2004 at 5:54 pm
lol since when did “cookies” become “spyware” puhleeze. cookies don’t do damage to computers.
*major eye roll*
July 31st, 2004 at 10:38 am
BUT they are used for tracking purposes e.g. you may even have to pay more for some items (ironically) because you have a specific cookie, also some cookies will get you banned from some professional organisation websites, and some lazy developers leave easy to read confidental information in cookies aka identify theft risk!
Get a clue newbie!