Booters: can anything justify distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks for hire?
Date | 13 March 2017 |
Pages | 90-104 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-09-2016-0033 |
Published date | 13 March 2017 |
Author | David Douglas,José Jair Santanna,Ricardo de Oliveira Schmidt,Lisandro Zambenedetti Granville,Aiko Pras |
Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information & communications technology |
Booters: can anything justify
distributed denial-of-service
(DDoS) attacks for hire?
David Douglas
Universiteit Twente, Philosophy, Enschede, The Netherlands
José Jair Santanna and Ricardo de Oliveira Schmidt
Department of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science (EWI),
Universiteit Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
Lisandro Zambenedetti Granville
Institute of Informatics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul,
Porto Alegre, Brazil, and
Aiko Pras
Department of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science (EWI),
Universiteit Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to examinewhether there are morally defensible reasons for using or operating
websites (called ‘booters’)that offer distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attackson a specified target to users
for a price. Bootershave been linked to some of the most powerful DDoS attacksin recent years.
Design/methodology/approach –The authors identify the various parties associated with booter
websites and the means through which booters operate. Then, the authors present and evaluate the two
arguments that they claim may be used to justify operatingand using booters: that they are a useful tool for
testing the ability of networks and servers to handle heavy traffic, and that they may be used to perform
DDoS attacksas a form of civil disobedience on the internet.
Findings –The authors argue that the characteristics of existing booters disqualify them from being
morally justified as network stresstesting tools or as a means of performing civil disobedience. The use of
botnets that include systems without the permission of their owners undermines the legitimacy of both
justifications.While a booter that does not use any third-party systems without permissionmight in principle
be justified under certainconditions, the authors argue that it is unlikely that any existingbooters meet these
requirements.
Practical/implications –Law enforcement agencies may use the arguments presented here to justify
shuttingdown the operation of booters, and so reduce the number of DDoS attacks on the internet.
Originality/value –The value of this work isin critically examining the potential justificationsfor using
and operating booterwebsites and in further exploring the ethicalaspects of using DDoS attacks as a form of
civil disobedience.
Keywords Internet, IT ethics, Civil disobedience, DDoS attacks, Hacktivism
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
During the 2014 Christmas holidays,Microsoft and Sony both suffered massive distributed
denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on their games console internet services (Xbox Live and
JICES
15,1
90
Received 5 September 2016
Revised 7 November 2016
Accepted 7 November 2016
Journalof Information,
Communicationand Ethics in
Society
Vol.15 No. 1, 2017
pp. 90-104
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1477-996X
DOI 10.1108/JICES-09-2016-0033
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1477-996X.htm
To continue reading
Request your trial