From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 22 01:06:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A54516A4D0 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 01:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.pair.com (relay.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A46C143D46 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 01:06:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 53051 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2004 08:06:52 -0000 Received: from niwun.pair.com (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70) by relay.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2004 08:06:52 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 03:16:12 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Darren Reed In-Reply-To: <200404220628.i3M6SHVJ017187@caligula.anu.edu.au> Message-ID: <20040422031525.E19921@odysseus.silby.com> References: <200404220628.i3M6SHVJ017187@caligula.anu.edu.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org cc: jayanth@yahoo-inc.com Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IETF Draft - Fix for TCP vulnerability (fwd) X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:06:54 -0000 On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Darren Reed wrote: > > 1. RSTs exactly at last_ack_sent (always accepted) > > To pursue this thought further, if a FIN has been sent or received > (connection has migrated from ESTABLISHED to CLOSE_WAIT or something > else) then receiving an RST at this point should be much less of a > problem, yes ? > > The only drawback is I've seen sessions where there's a last ditch > attempt to get data through even though a FIN has been received. > > Darren Are you suggesting that we use the strict check during the ESTABLISHED phase, and the window-wide check during all other phases? Mike "Silby" Silbersack