Prolexic Technologies
Open-knowledge reference entry
Prolexic Technologies was a US-based provider of security solutions for protecting websites, data centers, and enterprise IP applications from Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks at the network, transport, and application layers. It operated a DDoS mitigation platform and a global network of traffic scrubbing centers. Real-time monitoring and mitigation services were provided by a 24/7 security operations control center (SOCC). Prolexic indicated its DDoS mitigation services make websites, data centers and enterprise IP applications harder to take down via DDoS attacks.
In February 2014, cybersecurity and cloud services company Akamai Technologies acquired Prolexic Technologies.
History
In 2003 Prolexic Technologies was founded by Barrett Lyon and was the subject of the book Fatal System Error by Joseph Menn. Prolexic protects organizations in the following markets: airlines/hospitality, e-commerce, energy, financial services, gambling, gaming, public sector, and software as a service. Sony is said to be a customer of the company. Prolexic claims some of the largest banks as its clients.
In 2005, the company was named one of the 100 Hottest Private Companies in North America by Red Herring.
The public source identifies “Prolexic Technologies” as open-knowledge reference entry. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Prolexic, Technologies and Open-knowledge.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Prolexic Technologies”, the useful work is to connect “open-knowledge reference entry” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7249597. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2014, 2003 and 2005.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Prolexic Technologies”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Prolexic Technologies primary sources, Prolexic Technologies archive and Prolexic research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Prolexic Technologies”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Prolexic Technologies” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.