From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 7 11:12:12 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6906E541; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:12:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.tdx.com (mail.tdx.com [62.13.128.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8D5E1A; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:12:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk (storm.tdx.co.uk [62.13.130.251]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.tdx.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/) with ESMTP id s37BC48f001183 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 7 Apr 2014 12:12:04 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 12:12:03 +0100 From: Karl Pielorz To: John Baldwin Subject: Re: Stuck CLOSED sockets / sshd / zombies... Message-ID: <2C5B099DE2229F0E8D82D8C8@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <201404041613.09808.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <3FE645E9723756F22EF901AE@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> <201404031614.40951.jhb@freebsd.org> <18B08A7E8585B0C4A89A05E6@study64.tdx.co.uk> <201404041613.09808.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:12:12 -0000 --On 04 April 2014 16:13 -0400 John Baldwin wrote: > Ugh, ok. Is this easy to reproduce? Ok, yes - I can reproduce this now. I scanned the new host I setup with our security scanning software. This generated a number of sshd caught in 'urdlck' - and a large number of sockets that end up as 'CLOSE_WAIT' I'm guessing given time these will finally move to 'CLOSED' (it was scanned hours ago and there's still 50+ in CLOSE_WAIT state). As I said originally this can't be the only cause - but it is a cause. So now I can reproduce it - what next? Regards, -Karl