Here is a question we could not answer well a year ago: what really happens with hTTP/2 rapid reset one year later? We can answer it now.
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 economics behind it
A booter service rents out a 100 Gbps attack for less than the price of a pizza. Defending against it with bandwidth alone is a race you lose. Defending against it by making each malicious request cost more than it earns is a race you win.
This is the entire idea behind never metering attack traffic: our costs scale with filtering, not with your invoice.
Measuring success
We track three numbers for every incident: time to mitigation, the share of attack traffic that reached the origin, and the share of legitimate traffic that was challenged. The first should be under a second, the second under 0.1% and the third under 1%.
Those numbers go into every incident report, and they are the same numbers we are measured against in our SLA.
What we changed
We moved the decision from a single threshold to a continuous score, added an explanation to every decision and made every rule testable against historical traffic before it goes live.
The result is fewer late-night pages for our analysts and — more importantly — fewer real users challenged by mistake.
Why per-route baselines matter
A thousand requests per second to your homepage is Tuesday. A thousand requests per second to your password-reset endpoint is an attack. Global rate limits cannot tell the difference; per-route baselines can.
We learn the normal shape of traffic per route and per hour of the week, so a surge on a sensitive endpoint raises the risk score long before it approaches a global threshold.
Latency budget
Our budget for the whole filtering pipeline is one millisecond at the 99th percentile. Anything that cannot be decided within that budget runs asynchronously and influences the next request from the same client, not the current one.
That constraint shapes everything: data structures, where state lives and which signals we are willing to compute inline.
{ "match": { "path": "/login", "risk": ">= 64" }, "action": "challenge" }
We will follow up with the numbers from the next quarter.
Our auditors asked for exactly this kind of incident evidence under DORA.
Any plans to support per-tenant limits keyed on a JWT claim?