Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 13:37:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu> To: Mike D Tancsa <mdtancsa@sentex.net> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC-1644 attack ? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980407133535.27025B-100000@gdi.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <199804071737.NAA25812@granite.sentex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 7 Apr 1998, Mike D Tancsa wrote: > > What would be the effect of doing a > sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.rfc1644=0 > > Do I need to have this enabled ? If I disable it, what > will it break ? the RFC1644 extensions are just that, extensions to TCP to conserve resources when using TCP. Disabling them may cause a rise in the system's use of resources dedicated to the network. If this is substantiated then you need to send it to security@freebsd.org if you haven't already. That's a nasty attack :( Another reason to not use hosts.equiv. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980407133535.27025B-100000>