![]() |
|
Control several proxy's - Printable Version +- Sinisterly (https://sinister.li) +-- Forum: Computers (https://sinister.li/Forum-Computers) +--- Forum: Networking (https://sinister.li/Forum-Networking) +---- Forum: Anonymity (https://sinister.li/Forum-Anonymity) +---- Thread: Control several proxy's (/Thread-Control-several-proxy-s) |
Control several proxy's - Lifestyle009 - 06-02-2013 Hi all, Im working on this new project at school for my education (Business IT and management). We want them to show how vulnerable a business is when they are under attack by a DDoS-attack (Http and DNS variant). My question would be, is there any tool or program/software that can load up and control several proxy's at once? For example: We would perform a PING command on our domain at school (Special environment) to make it temporarily unavailable. therefore we need mulitiple proxy's to send a ping request to our domain. We have enough proxy, its just that we need a tool or program/software for loading them and controlling them like giving them a command. Thanks, Lifestyle009 RE: Control several proxy's - soh_cah_toa - 06-08-2013 So pretty much you need a way to control a botnet for performing a ICMP flood. Try looking into DarkH (http://www.hackcommunity.com/Thread-DarkH-v1-The-Weapon-Of-Mass-Destruction). I haven't personally used it yet but from what I can tell, you can issue commands to multiple machines using pastebin. Another technique is to use IRC for command and control. Bots log into a channel, you issue a command, bots obey. Simple yet effective. RE: Control several proxy's - Anima Templi - 06-08-2013 It's clear that you don't know what you are talking about. You should look more into DDOS and how it works before thinking about before starting such projects. You should already now that a simple ping command wouldn't be enough to take down a website. And the "handling of multiple proxies" you are talking about is called a botnet or a booter. Do your research before asking questions. RE: Control several proxy's - noize - 06-08-2013 OP looks to me like a big great complete non-sense. I'm sorry to tell you, but I don't think that anyone at school would teach you something like this. Not being it something you don't have the rights to learn, but if they really told you what you got, find a school with decent computer teachers. With my Mozilla Firefox I can control dozens of proxies all at once, if that's what you meant, 'cause I don't think I got what you meant. Ping.exe won't ever take down any creepy website. To take down a pretty small website you'd probably need millions of requests. RE: Control several proxy's - PVPPRO - 06-08-2013 I think he wants to use the proxys as a botnet to DDoS RE: Control several proxy's - noize - 06-08-2013 (06-08-2013, 08:32 PM)PVPPRO Wrote: I think he wants to use the proxys as a botnet to DDoS Proxy != bot. RE: Control several proxy's - Lifestyle009 - 06-10-2013 @Anima Templi, Its a shame you see it that way. And thanks for giving me answers that i can do something with :/ Im glad that i have received lots of private/pulbic messages with usefull answers. And no, i am not talking about botnets or booters. We are also NOT trying to make a server CRASH or anything like that. We just want to create some 'LAG'. For all the other people, thanks
RE: Control several proxy's - Anima Templi - 06-10-2013 One advice, forget about the ping command! You can't do anything with it, not even cause the slightest amount of "lag" on the site/server. RE: Control several proxy's - noize - 06-10-2013 (06-10-2013, 08:19 PM)Anima Templi Wrote: One advice, forget about the ping command! You can't do anything with it, not even cause the slightest amount of "lag" on the site/server. September 11 in 2001 one great news website (I can't remember which one, maybe CNN) crashed as people went in bulk to read about what happened. So, that's not completely right, but in facts, you're right, and surely one alone (or even many) can't do anything by just pinging a server. @OP, it's good that you're trying to learn something new, just that's the wrong way. |