Hacker Read

donavanm · 2012-09-18 04:35:25

Hrm, maybe Im misrembering. Found akamai claiming 125Gb/s in '09, and some more arbor quotes of ~110Gb/s. I'll see if I still have the report Im thinking of tomorrow.

http://wwwns.akamai.com/rsa_2011/RSA_NOCC_DDoS.pdf

reply

srcreigh | karma 1800 | avg karma 1.78 · | 2022-04-25 10:11:48

More details please if you have them. What was the throughput? number of transactions? Data size?

If you have that thread would be great to see it as well.

reply

dzik | karma 65 | avg karma 5.91 · | 2019-03-05 18:54:19

Sorry, where do the authors claim they achieved >100k connections per second?

herf | karma 2888 | avg karma 8.14 · | 2019-11-02 00:43:39

My P4 could do >400gbps AES128 in 2003. (We tested encrypted connections over Firewire.)

alexchamberlain | karma 3749 | avg karma 2.12 · | 2023-05-30 02:24:55

I think your calculations are off by a factor of 8 - network speeds are quoted in bits, rather than bytes. Apologies if I've misunderstood your comment though.

drewg123 | karma 13875 | avg karma 6.95 · | 2017-05-16 08:37:28

Found their datasheet too late to edit the above: "6 W at 10 Gbps, 4W at 5 Gbps" from http://www.aquantia.com/wp-content/uploads/AQN-107%20Brief%2...

bnprks | karma | avg karma · | 2023-11-01 11:57:52

The first sentence of the article claims 9.6 TB/s speeds, but the linked press releases only claim 9.6 Gbps -- 8000x slower

hyperpower | karma 67 | avg karma 3.35 · | 2018-03-01 16:17:35+00:00

Wow, 1.35Tbps? That's a lot for a DoS attack, right?

asdfaoeu | karma 1037 | avg karma 2.58 · | 2015-07-13 02:51:56+00:00

200Gbps (if true) seems very high for a non reflection attack.

drusenko | karma 5856 | avg karma 7.23 · | 2011-03-03 19:12:10+00:00

Do you know how many Gigabits per second it was?

pickle-wizard | karma 479 | avg karma 2.15 · | 2020-12-28 19:55:03

A few years ago we had one put in for a connection to VisaNET. ISO8353 messages are really small so 1.54Mbps was plenty fast for the number of transactions we were sending.

I'm trying to remember the exact number, but IIRC it was good for a couple of thousand transactions a second.

reply

MaymayMaster | karma 16 | avg karma 0.31 · | 2017-09-01 09:44:04

>on website it says, "...and if you look closely, those numbers are Megabytes-per-second..." when referring to their speeds

>is actually megabits-per-second

D R O P P E D

reply

rtkwe | karma 9876 | avg karma 2.03 · | 2016-09-26 14:29:37+00:00

The advertised bandwidth for the whole network is much lower than the 600+GBps that's attacking Kerbs it's a little under 200 GBps.

https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html

reply

jsharpe | karma 445 | avg karma 2.99 · | 2010-02-12 07:01:30+00:00

1 Gb/s, like 125 MB per second? Whoa.

Applejinx | karma 3405 | avg karma 2.16 · | 2018-05-17 08:39:40+00:00

In my experience, 124kbps.

ksec | karma 41816 | avg karma 3.09 · | 2022-01-06 11:52:58

And that is 400Gbps encrypted!

Side Note, aren't they 2U?

reply

shalmanese | karma 12333 | avg karma 5.81 · | 2022-11-15 06:34:02

> That means, again theoretically, a land based 864-core cable can carry over 200 exabits per second, and an oceanic 96-core can carry 23.5 exabits per second. That's bananas.

The total amount of data generated per day is estimated to be 97 zetabytes [0] which is only 9 exabits per second. You could run the entire internet off a single cable that winds its way around to every single person and they could just siphon off the data they need.

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/871513/worldwide-data-cr...

reply

steelbrain | karma 672 | avg karma 5.65 · | 2024-06-08 17:45:51

Posting a correction since I can no longer edit the original. It's actually 64Gbps (bits not bytes)

brokenmachine | karma 3145 | avg karma 0.82 · | 2024-07-01 23:27:43

If we're being pedantic...

320 milli bits per second? 0.32bps. That's not that much.

reply

jiggawatts | karma 26854 | avg karma 5.63 · | 2020-08-21 05:41:33+00:00

I'm curious to know how much data the root namespace servers put out in terms of gbps, but this doesn't seem to be public information.