![Internet_map_1024_-_transparent%2C_inverted[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/BLgAVNf.jpg "Internet_map_1024_-_transparent%2C_inverted[1].png")
Is there an equivalent of a nuke, but for the Internet?
I mean disabling internet for millions of users; how would one go about to do this?
HARD mode: no physical access to the cables or internet nodes
Create a botnet and get it out there, then have it delete their internet drivers or some shit.
DDoS The 13 (I think) root DNS servers.
>>51294098
BGP attacks
>>51294127
AHHAHAHHAH never going to happen
>>51294116
>internet drivers
wow such technology
>>51294200
china almost did it.
Be a shark
>>51294127
Probably this desu
Althuogh you could still access everything of course
>>51294098
You could take out these: https://www.iana.org/domains/root/servers
It wouldn't stop a person from being on the Internet, but it would effectively "disable" the Internet for millions of users.
>>51294127
Why are like 10 of 13 of rDNS servers in USA
>>51294127
Dude it's 13 root DNS domains, not servers. It's anycast there are literally thousands of them.
Also this would only prevent changes from propagating, since all the current stuff is cached in the DNS hierarchy
>>51294233
I've been awake for like three quarters of a day, fuck it. Internet drivers. For interneting.
>>51294266
Because they invented the Internet. Also see >>51294267
It's not only 13 servers
>>51294272
>internet drivers for interneting
i cant stop laughing fuck oyu
Buy a company like level3 and fuck with your routing.
Where does the internet actually come from and how is it made?
Man, technology is weird.
>>51294285
So what was AlterNIC? Was it, alternative Internet or something then?
Wikipedia article is pretty.. confusing.
>>51294323
Magic.
>>51294323
>Where does the internet actually come from
From the Big Ben, you doofus
>>51294098
OP
You can't possibly "nuke" the internet without physical access to cables.
Submarine cables are the weak point, in fact US is worried China and Russia can damage the cable and cause a massive outage worldwide.
>>51294127
>>51294237
>>51294254
>>51294266
>>51294267
>>51294249
THIS IS NEVER GOING TO WORK.
>>51294267
Someone gets it.
Anycasting is a tweek to the Internet routing table so that traffic destined for an IP address is redirected to a different local server. Thus, while it may appear that the "K" root DNS server has only a single IP address "193.0.14.129", in fact there are 20 machines with that address spread throughout the world. When I trace the route to the "K" server from Comcast in Atlanta, it goes to a server located at an exchange point in Virginia. If you do your own traceroute, you are likely to find a different location for the server.
Another reasons is the root servers are not located on the edges of the Internet, but are instead located at nexus points on the Internet backbone where many links come together. Even using the DDOS "network amplification" technique, it won't overload the network connections leading to the root servers.
Such attacks might overwhelm the servers themselves, but here amplification is much less of a threat. Whereas the raw "bits-per-second" is the primary limiting factor for Internet links, "packets-per-second" is the primary limiting factor for servers. The amplification technique results is bigger packers, but not more of them, so amplification affects servers less.
ere isn't one.
>Connect 2 NICs
>10.0.0.1/8, 10.0.0.2/8
>???
>Internet
>>51294266
The internet was originally created by the US military for communication after a nuclear war. All the knowledge was in the US at first, so that's where a lot of the original growth was.
>>51294347
cont
All a root server does is resolve the last part of the name, like ".com" or ".jp". It then passes the result to the "gtld-servers". That means while the servers are designed for millions of requests per second, they practically only serve a few thousand per second.
Indeed, the best way to cause a "global blackout" wouldn't be to attack the root servers themselves, but the "gtld-servers" the next level down, or even the individual domain-specific servers (like those for Google or Facebook) at the next level. If people can't get to their Google, Twitter, and Facebook, the Internet is down as far as they are concerned.
Also let's say you shutdown successfully all the root servers. Tough shit. Your don't interact with the root DNS directly. Instead, you ask your Internet provider (Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, etc.) to do it for you. They don't need to repeatedly ask the same question to the root servers every time one of their customers clicks on "www.facebook.com". Instead, they can remember the response from the first lookup, then use that response for the rest of the customers who ask. This is called "caching" the response. The amount of time they cache the response, before redoing the lookup, is known as the "time-to-live" or "TTL".
>>51294328
>51294328
any1?
>>51294127
>>51294127
>>51294127
When Anonymous threaten an attack to the root servers. They all laughed at them.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/02/16/anonymous-plans-to-take-down-the-internet-were-being-trolled/
Everyone trying to meddle with the big infrastructure is doing it wrong, that's never gonna work.
You're better off writing a virus that disables people's ethernet drivers or something dumb like that. Users are way easier to target than government corporations that literally run the internet.
>>51294328
If you want to get technical you could call it a prototype or something, but the US are still the ones that first built it up into any kind of non-trivial scale.
>>51294504
You'll fuck over a decent amount of end-users, but it will still only be a drop in the bucket, hotfixes will quickly be pushed to everyone else long before your payload gets to them. Same as every other virus like this that's been made in the past intended to fuck with mass amounts of people. It always gets contained relatively quickly.
>>51296369
Also it would be hard to do this without triggering a UAC prompt, and I know for a fact that while many dumb end-users just mindlessly click them, just as many tend to fail to notice they're even there and just let them sit ignored in the background.
>>51294098
Take down Facebook and Youtube. That's all there is to the "Internet" these days.
>>51296425
this is actually very effective, but then other sites like google+ and vessel would grow
>>51296425
And then people go on twitter and talk about how annoying it is that Facebook is down, while most everyone just treats it the same as pretty much every other big server DDOS that kids have been doing for literally centuries now.
>>51296425
The problem is that it's simply not possible to keep them down for long enough for this to have any serious impact. Even if their techs totally shit the bed the worst you could reasonably hope for is to keep it down for a day or two, which would only be a minor inconvenience for most people, forgotten almost as soon as it comes back up again. If you really wanted to accomplish anything you'd have to keep it down for months, but there is simply no way whatsoever that they would ever allow you to do this under any circumstance.
>>51294385
>>51294347
This was very informative, thank you.
What OS do the root servers run?
>>51294385
Do you think it would be possible to knock off pieces of the internet, as in take out a regional ISP by targeting its peering connections?
>>51294098
You could foul up the BGP routing tables pretty rotten in a bunch of places simultaneously, causing massive changes in latency and availability for various services.
>>51296425
>Take down Facebook
kek, the jew of zuckenberg knows how to protect his money.
>>51296480
Osx like 4chun
