Right wing cyber attacks on Healthcare.gov website confirmed

[MadMan1978]

Very interesting comments from the hearings this week. I am not surprised at all.


http://www.examiner.com/article/righ...site-confirmed

[habsheaven]

I'm more than not surprised, actually expected it. They have and will try anything.

[Wickabee]

I was at a party last month and a computer type guy (not sure exactly what he does; something with internet programming, from home and he makes a mint is all I really know) told me this is actually the only possible way for the site to have the problems it has. I filed it away under 'wait and see' so I can't say I'm surprised either.

[pwaldo]

I was at a party last month and a computer type guy (not sure exactly what he does; something with internet programming, from home and he makes a mint is all I really know) told me this is actually the only possible way for the site to have the problems it has. I filed it away under 'wait and see' so I can't say I'm surprised either.

Well considering it had problems by the web designs BEFORE the site launched, wasn't ready to launch, and the history of the company building it was fired for making bad and nonworking sites in Canada I wouldn't say that was the only way it would make it unworkable.

The people who made the site said it could only support a tiny amount of people every day and it was based on 10 year old technology. They also designed it so you had to input your name, click get another page, enter your address, click and get another page, etc. That added unnecessary and stupid pressure on the site. It was later fixed in the updates but a kid in high school wouldn't have a website do that why would a company that got 3 plus years and almost $1 billion do that?

You also had the problem of people entering data that was screwed up. The man who the website kept showing as having multiple wives, people who couldn't relogin because it said the password wasn't correct, the people who after entering all data kept it saying they hadn't entered any data and had to retype it, etc. None of these problems had anything to do with a DDoS attack. Just a very poorly coded program and website. You also had the phone lines going down and nobody showing up in person to sign up on paper which wouldn't be effected by a cyber attack either.

Plus any website should have a secure defense against cyber attacks and criminals looking to steal information or cause havoc and given the huge budget of the website I'd like to know how much was spent on security because if they can't stop this then they didn't spend much. If you thing that stuff is something wait until China or somebody with skill decided to attack the website.

[shrewsbury]

well DDoS is illegal and should be easy to trace back to its origins if it has been distributed via social media.

quite often these are done from thousands of computers controlled by implanting the "virus" through open ports.

DDoS is also the easiest thing to guard against, even your local cable company has the means to protect their server from these types of attacks, much less a billion dollar government project.

and as explained above, most of teh issues with the site have nothing to do with a DDoS attack.

but I am sure there are plenty who are trying

the best part of this is it is on the examiner, what a joke!!

hey look what was on the same page

http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/ap...n-mars#slide=5

[Rockin Robbie]

Well considering it had problems by the web designs BEFORE the site launched, wasn't ready to launch, and the history of the company building it was fired for making bad and nonworking sites in Canada I wouldn't say that was the only way it would make it unworkable.

The people who made the site said it could only support a tiny amount of people every day and it was based on 10 year old technology. They also designed it so you had to input your name, click get another page, enter your address, click and get another page, etc. That added unnecessary and stupid pressure on the site. It was later fixed in the updates but a kid in high school wouldn't have a website do that why would a company that got 3 plus years and almost $1 billion do that?

You also had the problem of people entering data that was screwed up. The man who the website kept showing as having multiple wives, people who couldn't relogin because it said the password wasn't correct, the people who after entering all data kept it saying they hadn't entered any data and had to retype it, etc. None of these problems had anything to do with a DDoS attack. Just a very poorly coded program and website. You also had the phone lines going down and nobody showing up in person to sign up on paper which wouldn't be effected by a cyber attack either.

Plus any website should have a secure defense against cyber attacks and criminals looking to steal information or cause havoc and given the huge budget of the website I'd like to know how much was spent on security because if they can't stop this then they didn't spend much. If you thing that stuff is something wait until China or somebody with skill decided to attack the website.

well DDoS is illegal and should be easy to trace back to its origins if it has been distributed via social media.

quite often these are done from thousands of computers controlled by implanting the "virus" through open ports.

DDoS is also the easiest thing to guard against, even your local cable company has the means to protect their server from these types of attacks, much less a billion dollar government project.

and as explained above, most of teh issues with the site have nothing to do with a DDoS attack.

but I am sure there are plenty who are trying

the best part of this is it is on the examiner, what a joke!!

hey look what was on the same page

http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/ap...n-mars#slide=5

Just curious at what point the cost of building the website morphed from the mythical $634 million into a billion dollar project?

[pwaldo]

Just curious at what point the cost of building the website morphed from the mythical $634 million into a billion dollar project?

Well I was going by the number first reported on the website:

http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...llion-to-build

but it looks that that was incorrect. Some places then said it less than $95 million which was suppose to be their original budget. But that doesn't look to be correct either. The best thing I could find was this with all the updates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...care-gov-cost/

First reported $634 million

Updated to

A conservative figure would be $70 million. A more modest figure would be $125 million to $150 million. Or one could embrace the entire project, as outlined by GAO, and declare that it is at least $350 million.

Updated to

To sum up: The floor for spending on the Web site to date appears to be at least $170 million, with an upward potential of nearly $300 million.

Updated to

Update, Oct. 30: In testimony on Capitol Hill, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said, in response to a direct question: “Congresswoman, we have spent about $118 million on the website itself, and about $56 million has been expended on other IT to support the web.” That adds up to $174 million.

So $174 million unless it was updated again or does somebody have the correct number since nobody else seems to be sharing it?