Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 09:40:53 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net> Cc: "Daniel J. O'Connor" <darius@senet.com.au>, Daniel Leeds <dleeds@dfacades.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: land patch? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.971129093802.4819A-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971129085003.277A-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 29 Nov 1997, Alex wrote: > On Sat, 29 Nov 1997, Daniel J. O'Connor wrote: > > > > is there a patch for freebsd 2.2.5 to defeat the land attack? > > > is it just one file in the kernel source tree that needs to be > > > rebuilt with the newest code? > > I tried this on my 2.2.2 machine, and it survived with no problems! :) > > Ditto for teardrop. > > According to someone on BugTraq, a bug was "fixed" with the tcp-stack > after 2.2.2, that makes 2.2.5 machines vunerable to these attacks. > Patches should have already been checked into the source tree, and can be > retreived via cvsup or ctm (see the handbook > http://www.freebsd.org/handbook). However, it is very unclear what the effect of the this bug was. land.c certainly doesn't seem to hang FreeBSD, but it does mess with the stack a bit. Using tcpdump on an old FreeBSD system, the land.c seems to cause a packet to repeat over and over again. It seems to eat up some CPU, and some buffer space. > - alex Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.971129093802.4819A-100000>