From owner-freebsd-current Wed Sep 29 0:46:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from not.demophon.com (ns.demophon.com [193.65.70.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366C714BFD for ; Wed, 29 Sep 1999 00:45:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@not.demophon.com) Received: (from will@localhost) by not.demophon.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) id KAA20435; Wed, 29 Sep 1999 10:45:17 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from will) To: Warner Losh Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: just found this References: <199909282101.PAA06277@harmony.village.org.newsgate.clinet.fi> From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen Date: 29 Sep 1999 10:45:16 +0300 In-Reply-To: Warner Losh's message of "29 Sep 1999 00:02:09 +0300" Message-ID: <867lla5fg2.fsf@not.demophon.com> Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.4 - "Emerald" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Warner Losh writes: > In message Kenneth Culver writes: > : Check this out, if anyone is intrested. > : > : I found this on packetstorm.securify.com tonight. Any ideas?? > Mycroft sent this out after we had fixed this before the 3.3R > release. At least it appeared in bugtraq after it had been fixed in > FreeBSD, as far as I can tell. It isn't in -current, does this mean that it wasn't considered an acceptable long-term solution? Really large numbers of hardlinks are probably rare enough, but the default limit of 4 seems a bit low, it should probably be at least as high as the maximum link count encountered on a normal installation. There are other ways to hold down at least as much memory per file you can keep open as with the limit of 4. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message