Access member only content, take part in discussions with comments on blogs, news and reviews and receive all the latest security industry news directly to your inbox. Join now for free.
Processing registration... Please wait.
This process can take up to a minute to complete.
A confirmation email has been sent to your email address - SUPPLIED EMAIL HERE. Please click on the link in the email to verify your email address. You need to verify your email before you can start posting.
If you do not receive your confirmation email within the next few minutes, it may be because the email has been captured by a junk mail filter. Please ensure you add the domain @scmagazine.com.au to your white-listed senders.
A botnet of servers used for the popular gaming title Call of Duty have been hijacked and used in a 10 gigabit distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack.
The attack bombarded a small unnamed business with a UDP flood by exploiting a flaw that is still present in thousands of game servers.
The flaw meant that servers did not require a valid player session in order to process replies.
This allowed attackers to write code to send UDP packets to the victim by spoofing the IP address.
European anti-DDoS vendor VistNet, which moved to block the attack, said thousands of vulnerable sites could be found with a “quick Google search”.
Administrators could apply a patch to fix the flaw, which rate limited reply packets to a given IP address.
The fix logged an attackers’ IP address when query packets were sent, and ignored further queries for a set time.
Administrators of hacked Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare servers had initially thought VistNet was behind the attacks. Few understood how their servers were compromised, the company said.
Copyright © SC Magazine, Australia
To begin commenting right away, you can log in below or register an account if you don't yet have one. Please read our guidelines on commenting. Offending posts will be removed and your access may be suspended. Abusive or obscene language will not be tolerated. The comments below do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of SC Magazine, Haymarket Media or its employees.
