Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 04:41:09 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <charon@hades.hell.gr> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stream.c worst-case kernel paths Message-ID: <20000122044109.A27337@hades.hell.gr> In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20000121165135.01a543b0@localhost> References: <200001212315.PAA64608@apollo.backplane.com> <4.2.2.20000120182425.01886ec0@localhost> <20000120195257.G14030@fw.wintelcom.net> <4.2.2.20000120220649.018faa80@localhost> <4.2.2.20000120222630.01919150@localhost> <4.2.2.20000121163454.01a58e30@localhost> <4.2.2.20000121165135.01a543b0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 04:52:10PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > At 04:37 PM 1/21/2000 , I wrote: > > > Perhaps one should stop dropping RSTs when it's clear that the number > > you're sending is greater than the number of connections you've had in a > > good long while! > > I meant "stop sending RSTs," of course. We do need a smart way of selecting which RSTs not to send though. If we just stop sending RSTs after we exceed a number, and an attacker launches the packet storm before we reach the closing state with some other long-distance socket, the limit will be reached with the RSTs of the attacker and the long-distance socket will just have to time out. -- Giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000122044109.A27337>