**Musk Claims of Ukraine DDoS Attack Derided by Cyber Community**

In a recent statement, tech mogul Elon Musk drew criticism from the cybersecurity community for his unsubstantiated claims that Ukraine was behind an apparent distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack on his social media platform, X. The incident, which brought down X services for many users on Monday, March 10, has sparked debate among experts about the true nature of the attack.

**Musk's Accusations**

Speaking to Fox Business news channel, Musk claimed that a "massive cyber attack" targeting X appeared to have originated from IP addresses located in Ukraine. However, Ukrainian officials were quick to refute this suggestion, stating that Kyiv was not involved in the incident.

**Ciaran Martin's Response**

Former National Cyber Security Centre head Ciaran Martin described Musk's accusations as "unconvincing and pretty much garbage." In a conversation with the BBC, Martin stated that it would be difficult for an organization of X's scale to be so badly impacted by such an incident in recent years. He suggested that the incident did not paint a good picture of the platform's wider cyber resilience.

**How DDoS Attacks Work**

For those unfamiliar with the term, a DDoS attack involves malicious actors bombarding a server with junk web traffic to overwhelm it, forcing it offline and leaving legitimate users unable to access it. Such attacks are well-known and relatively common, often forming a key element in hacktivist actions due to their accessibility.

However, DDoS attacks are launched via geographically dispersed networks of computers and other devices that have been co-opted into botnets without the owner's knowledge or consent. This makes it extremely difficult to accurately locate the individuals responsible for them.

**Attributing DDoS Incidents**

Tom Parker, cyber security author and chief technology officer (CTO) at NetSPI, stated that while the magnitude of the attack did strongly suggest the involvement of a sophisticated threat actor, accurately attributing DDoS incidents is "notoriously difficult." He warned against pointing fingers and sabre rattling without clear and compelling evidence to demonstrate capability, motive, and likely benefit for the party involved.

Parker suggested that Ukraine is still seeking to foster a more positive relationship with the US, making it unlikely that Musk's claims are well-grounded. Instead, he proposed that the scenario may align more with a "false flag" operation deliberately crafted to implicate Ukraine.

**Pro-Palestinian Hacktivist Group Claims Responsibility**

A pro-Palestinian hacktivist group known as Dark Storm Team subsequently claimed via Telegram that it had been behind the incident. An account on the Bluesky social media platform claiming to be associated with this group and appearing to have links to the Anonymous collective described the DDoS attack as a peaceful protest, stating that attacks would continue.

**Cyber Security Expert Warns of Increasing Difficulty in Protecting Against DDoS Attacks**

Jake Moore, global cyber security advisor at ESET, warned that cyber criminals attack from all angles and are incredibly fearless in their attempts. He noted that DDoS attacks are a clever way of targeting a website without having to hack into the mainframe, making it difficult to protect against such threats.

Moore emphasized that even with generic DDoS protection, threat actors become better equipped and use more IP addresses such as home IoT devices to flood systems, making it increasingly more difficult to protect from. He advised that X remains a popular target for hackers and that the platform should continue to expect the unexpected and build robust DDoS protection layers.

**Conclusion**

The incident highlights the complexities and challenges of attributing cyber attacks. While Musk's claims have been largely dismissed by the cybersecurity community, it is essential to remain vigilant and take proactive measures to protect against such threats.