COMING NEXT WEEK: New DOS-like attacks on Healthcare.gov?

[winstars]

I have been wondering this for a while now, knowing that eventually we would get the website working correctly.

My thought is that once the website is working adequately, will the scum on the other side really ramp up their efforts to tie up the servers with endless visits to the site just to slow it down and crash it? When the administration says that the site will be able to handle 50k unique visitors at one time, isn't that almost a call to arms for the 'pugs to try to then bog it down. I can imagine Rushbo and his ilk calling out to their vermin to "check" the website early and often the day(s) after someone dares to say it is now working correctly. (12/1/2013?)

I know there have been isolated reports of this tactic occurring since 10/1/2013 but due to the website not really working all on its own, I believe that this plan has yet to be fully implemented by the scum. It would not take much for them to organize it, how long can they sustain it is the question. I don't think its a matter of if, more a matter of when and how. I would guess that they already had this plan good to go but did not need to use it since we basically did it for them with the not so great roll out...

Incredibly, one thing that might help is the much maligned "sign in first, then browse" feature that is/was slowing things down for everyone who went to HeathCare.gov. Might this feature now discourage these "people" from doing the above by having to sign in or can you just fake it and then play around, using up the bandwidth and the like???

I am just trying to think ahead. I would like to think that the administration has had this thought also... but they do scare me sometimes about the the most obvious of moves the other side makes.

Is this technically possible and is it possible for us to preclude this from happening in a big way???


After all this is strictly business, we must win!!!

[LeftyMom]

1. You're forgetting that the average Republican is a million years old and not great with technology.

[winstars]

2. Hopefully they won't pay their grandkids to do it then... LOL

They are not all watching Faux and dying during the gold commercials...

They are organized and have plenty of Koch $$$ to do this. I am not a tech but it seems to me it wouldn't be that hard to just cause more havoc without a lot of effort...

[LeftyMom]

4. If they were going to do that they'd already be doing it to state websites that work.

I can't speak for other states but if the California exchange (which has been the most successful when last I heard) was being subjected to unusual attacks it would definitely be all over the local media, and it's not.

[winstars]

5. I signed up my GF on the CA site and it rocks...

I just hope that when some sort of announcement is made saying it is working, that the scum don't hear this as a dog whistle to try to mess with us.

Just saying...

[aristocles]

3. It's hard to circumvent a complex concerted DOS

There are hackers out there will do it for a fee, regardless of political affiliation.

The wonder is that it doesn't occur more often.

[karend62]

6. human DOS not a threat

DOS (denial of service) attacks are automated http requests that overwhelm the ability of the server to respond. The fact that healthcare.gov was brought down by human traffic is purely a function of poor site design (and architecture). Even if a wingnut convinces a few dozen (or a few thousand) of his friends to sign onto the federal ACA site, it should have a negligible effect on the website performance.

Large scale sites like Amazon and Microsoft face automated DOS attacks on a regular basis. There are safe guards that can be put in place to minimize the possibility of a site crash during a DOS.

Although it is tempting to blame evil Teahadists for the failure of healthcare.gov, HHS brought this disaster upon themselves.

[gopiscrap]

7. welcome to DU