[191413] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Atkins)
Tue Sep 13 14:47:59 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEGzzUST7rP0-wdyXjEzT2xcxAfrcEm9ER7fO-jxPEk5mvRJRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:47:56 -0700
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 12:22 AM, Bryant Townsend <bryant@backconnect.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> *Events that caused us to perform the BGP hijack*: After the DDoS =
attacks
> subsided, the attackers started to harass us by calling in using =
spoofed
> phone numbers. Curious to what this was all about, we fielded various =
calls
> which allowed us to ascertain who was behind the attacks by =
correlating
> e-mails with the information they provided over the phone. Throughout =
the
> day and late into the night, these calls and threats continued to =
increase
> in number. Throughout these calls we noticed an increasing trend of =
them
> bringing up personal information of myself and employees. At this =
point I
> personally filled a police report in preparation to a possible SWATing
> attempt. As they continued to harass our company, more and more red =
flags
> indicated that I would soon be targeted. This was the point where I =
decided
> I needed to go on the offensive to protect myself, my partner, =
visiting
> family, and my employees.=20
I think you're saying that the BGP hijack wasn't done in as part of an =
attempt to
mitigate a DDoS, rather that you used the tools you had available
to go on the offensive in response to phone calls you received. Am I =
reading
that right?
Cheers,
Steve=
