Simulating the Reported Archive.today Request Flood — Analysis & Defense

When an Archive Becomes a Traffic Weapon — new simulation & analysis

Long-form breakdown of the reported archive.today behavior, step-by-step explanation of the code's effect, simulation, videos, and sources. Allegations are presented as reported by linked sources. :contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}


Auto narration: ON
Interactive simulation

Simulation of Repeated Request Attack — Visual (safe)

This interactive simulation shows how a short client-side timer + randomized query pattern builds steady request traffic. Important: the demo does not perform any network requests — every URL is simulated and local to your browser.

300 ms
Total requests
0
Requests/sec
0.00
Mode
Sim-only
[Simulated request log — no network requests are made]

Technical breakdown — why repeated randomized requests increase load

The observed pattern reported in the original investigation calls a target endpoint with randomized query parameters on each timer tick. Because each request appears unique, intermediate caches (CDNs and reverse proxies) cannot serve cached responses for subsequent requests — the origin must process each one. The cumulative effect across many clients is a high, continuous request rate that can exhaust CPU, I/O and database resources.

Mechanics (short)

  1. Timer: a function scheduled every N ms (reported ~300ms).
  2. Randomization: the query string includes a random token to prevent cache hits.
  3. Request: the page issues a network request (reported as `fetch()` in the original post).
  4. Repeat: continues while the page remains open — each browser becomes a small traffic generator.

When many visitors have that page open, the aggregate request rate multiplies rapidly. This is the effect the community described as DDoS-like. See the primary report for the investigator's full code sample and screenshots. :contentReference[oaicite:7]{index=7}

Community walkthroughs & videos

Analysts and community members recorded demonstrations and logs that accompany the investigation.

Timeline & community reaction

The Gyrovague write-up laid out the timeline and included screenshots and correspondence; the post generated active discussion on Hacker News and Reddit as users analyzed code, reproduced logs, and debated intent. :contentReference[oaicite:8]{index=8}

Notable community points:

  • Users on Hacker News examined the snippet and asked for reproducible tests; various participants validated the observed network pattern. :contentReference[oaicite:9]{index=9}
  • Reddit /r/DataHoarder participants discussed mitigation and shared their own observations and logs. :contentReference[oaicite:10]{index=10}
  • Archival community aggregators (Lobsters) collected context and background on the history and related threads. :contentReference[oaicite:11]{index=11}

Sources & primary materials

Read the primary reporting and community threads yourself:

Comments