• Zworf@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Hm yes and no. The user might have angered someone with their website and it might well have been targeted to them instead of Netlify as a whole? I can imagine them using that point in a court if that was the case.

    If I were to host on such a service I’d probably put cloudflare in front. Especially as it seems to be static content. But I wouldn’t host on a service with unlimited pricing anyway. I’d much rather see my hobby site go down than to have world-class uptime and pay 100k :P

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      8 months ago

      But how do you go from 10GB monthly to 190TB without it raising any flags? Apparently their site had been up for 4 years and suddenly the usage spikes by nearly 2 million percent, and nobody thinks to check up on why, or to notify the user that they’re using an extreme amount of data, way beyond what they usually do.

      • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’d think a competent company would have bots to scour this data and raise alarms, yet here we are.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Hell even AWS isn’t this bad. You can go in and set the maximum data you’re prepared to allow and then it’ll simply just block any connection attempt after that point and send you an alert.

          You just have to be aware that you might need to keep an eye on things and be ready to increase bandwidth occasionally in case of something like Black Friday, assuming that kind of thing is relevant to your site.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The user might have angered someone with their website and it might well have been targeted to them instead of Netlify as a whole? I can imagine them using that point in a court if that was the case.

      They wouldn’t really get anywhere with that claim though, even if it were true and they could find evidence, because the company claims that they actively scan for and protect against this sort of thing, and even they admit that it was a DDoS attack.