New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
100TB GVH? You mean 1.66TB
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
He clearly said he was going to request the refund right after.
I don't know about you, but considering his history and the previous stated, it's obvious he was just trying to DoS
For what it's worth, I never bothered with trying to get a refund or even contacting PayPal.
Is this from the same guy that claims df -h is affected by updatedb?
I have no idea what he was talking about (couldn't care less tbh.)
/topic
Provide me a quote from this thread that clearly shows his intention was to 'DoS' another host.
Reading this whole thread, it is clear that he just wanted to see if the 100TB offer was a genuine 100TB of bandwidth or a typical LE* 100TB that actually gets capped by the host at about 2TB.
I do remember a few occasions something being said about XX party, shortly after DDOS attacks happened. Coincidence as ever.. you can't pinpoint anything and lets be fair no one with a half a braincell would send such attacks from there own network. That's what they love Hackforums for.
This song applies here:
I hope OP doesn't get a refund. Unless that refund is a roundhouse kick to the face.
You may want to give shovey your name, It applies better to him.
Mun
SHOW US PROOF OF THE COMPLAINT. !
without it this thread is going nowhere, and there is absolutely no reason to point fingers at shovenose !
trash?
I can only say: if you are not satisfied with "what you get" send a refund notice to them... you allways get what you pay.
They do great offers, i was not satisfied, sent a refund notice, got my money back....
Actually I don't agree with that.
It was dick move no matter how you put it.
All I did was wget cron a speed test file every minute. No resource usage except for bandwidth. My calculation with the size of the file and the time was that it would end up using about 85-90TB by the end of the month. At that time, I would have taken advantage of the 45 day money back guarantee.
It's better not to complain in public when you're being chased by DDoS bullies, that's the part that they love and what entertains them most.
Ofcourse it was a dickmove i think no one will disagree with this BUT
the complaint mentioned "DoS" ? what he was doing could be considered bandwidth draining but it wasn't a real DoS attack.. a DoS attack wouldn't be a cronjob that runs every x minutes to DOWNLOAD a file
A real DoS attack will output realtime/continously data TOWARDS a IP
how can some people even question this? its unbelievable, how can that be a valid complaint? where is the proof of that complaint?
LET Administrators are the ones to blame here. See their lame excuses for permitting GVH to make such a ridiculous offer, http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/20028/greenvaluehost-is-now-in-ny-tx-la-check-out-this-massive-blowout-sale-starting-3-100tb-bw, KNOWING VERY WELL THAT THE COMPANY WHICH OWNS THIS FORUM AS WELL AS BEING THE PROVIDER FOR GreenValueHost WOULDN'T ALLOW OR SUSTAIN IT.
http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/20126/colocrossing-et-al
That is right. It is in ALL CAPS AND BOLD
Why don't they MAN UP and accept their responsibility here?
The admins here are really making LET look truly farcical
No, that is not what a DoS attack is. A DoS attack is simply abusing a service until it stops functioning as intended, this doesn't even have to be network related. Regardless I'm pretty sure he would have done some damage to the speedtest server once the month had past as he would have wasted ~85TB on not just what he paid for but also on a free, public speedtest server.
It was dick move no matter how you put it.
If you call this dick move I would say both sides should be called dick move.
I don't see GVH being more honorable here advertising a 100TB VPS for $5 and betting on none of the clients would push even close to that limit.
If you give me a IP of one of your personal servers then i'll show you the difference,
first i'd run a cronjob that DOWNLOADS a file every 1 minute from your server and then afterwards i show how a DoS attack works on that same IP, dont just take my word for it send me a url of your personal server that hosts a testfile and let me show the huge difference, i dont mind.
Even though this has been explained to you a number of times, I'm going to throw my hat into the ring just to try and hit home this point.
DoS stands for denial of service. It has nothing to do with sending and everything to do with 'denying service'. Sure you can deny a service by sending traffic, but you can also achieve it a number of other ways.
If you perform an action which denies the use of that service to another user then it is a DoS attack. If downloading that test file multiple times led to others users unable to access the file or to suffer a degraded experience in using that file it is Denial of Service.
By that definition it would be a "Denial of Service" if a website could only handle 10 concurrent visitors and i would be the 10th with an 11th being "denied service".
Not sure what's up now, but my server with them just went down and their SolusVM claims to be having database issues.
That's nonsense!
"Hey buddy, your LET offer does not break any rule however your deal seems too good to be true and because of that I am going to remove it" - do you really expect me to do this? Do you?!
You have own brains, use them instead blaiming others for not playing net nanny and protect you from your own bad decisions!
There can be plenty legitimate reasons to remove some's offers from LET and as a volunteer I am doing this on daily basis, but yours (or mine) personal feelings about quality of service isn't one of them.
I get that, but there is just a huge difference between sending out a real DoS Attack or just downloading a file from a mirror with a 1 minute interval
it both is being executed in a different way and if it was a real DoS Attack then it would be illegal aswel?
thats what im aiming at and I think it is common sense, but maybe i'm wrong.
If I'm hosting provider I will terminate OP too.
That generally happens when the server is hard-booted with active SolusVM sessions. Deleting mysql.sock and restarting MySQL on the host node will usually resolve it.
I don't know why mark doesn't understand that making that is by definition a DoS.
As an example, arduinocan just manage 4 concurrent connections using Ethernet. What if someone open the 4 connections? That's a DoS.
Inb4:
Is a speed test file designed and posted on webservers at hosting companies for "speed testing" there connection, or to be used to max out your bandwidth allotment for the month? I mean we can debate all day if it is a DOS or not, but in any circumstance, @shovenose was using a test file wrongfully, and not for its intended purpose.
Mun
LOL, no wonder you are #WINNING. Take the customers 5$ and then when they try to use the server you terminate their account. Doesn't this really sum up the whole point of this thread? You are offering an unrealistic product and have brought this lameness onto your self by doing so. The fact you would brag your terminating 15-20 abusers a day should solidify this fact as you are taking their money and not providing the service you promised and instead terminating 'abusers' when they do try to use the service.
Seriously @GreenValueHost withdraw this stupid 100TB bandwidth product from your offerings, apologize to the community for your poor business decisions and practices and let us move on from this. You are just digging the hole deeper for your self with every post you make trying to defend your self here.
It is no longer about how moronic @ShoveNose is (we are used to his moronic tripe), it is how moronic you are to even be offering such a product and not expecting it to be used in the way it has. Period.
Cheers!
@TheLinuxBug - I am referring to abusers whom are using their VPS as CPU miners, hosting copyrighted content they dont own, illegal porn, botnet scripts, nulled content, etc. Not necessarily resource abuse. And when we kick people out for the stuff I listed above, we provide them evidence along with it. And please don't tell me that any hosts here on this forum would accept any of that.
Please don't just make assumptions.