Why we wrote our proxy data plane in Rust (part 2)

This post is about why we wrote our proxy data plane in Rust. It started, as most of our posts do, with an incident that did not go the way we expected.

Compliance is a side effect

Regulators increasingly ask for evidence of resilience, not just promises. An incident timeline with start, peak, vectors and impact is exactly the evidence DORA and NIS2 ask for — and it falls out of good observability for free.

We export incident reports in formats auditors can file without anyone rewriting them.

Challenges beat blocks

Blocking lists go stale within minutes when attackers rotate through residential proxies. Proof-of-work does not care where a request comes from; it only cares whether the client is willing to pay the cost.

For a real browser that cost is a few hundred milliseconds, once per session. For a botnet sending a million requests a minute it is a million puzzles a minute — and at that point the attack stops being cheap.

The numbers

Across the last quarter, 71% of challenged clients never attempted a solution, 24% solved one challenge and then behaved normally, and 5% solved challenges repeatedly while continuing to attack — the last group is where analysts spend their time.

Median added latency for legitimate visitors that were challenged was 280 ms on desktop and 410 ms on mid-range Android devices.

Testing in production, safely

Every rule starts in log mode. We replay the previous seven days of traffic through it and show exactly which requests it would have affected before anyone can promote it to challenge or block.

This one feature has prevented more incidents than any detection we have ever shipped.

The full incident data behind this post is available to customers in the dashboard under Reports.