bugtraq - Re: Re[2]: 11 years of inetd default insecurity?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 05:11:12 +1000 (EST)
From: psz@...hs.usyd.edu.au (Paul Szabo)
To: 3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re:  Re[2]: 11 years of inetd default insecurity?

3APA3A <3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU> wrote:

>>> -R 0 -s your_ad_can_be_here
> 
>> Your  cure  is  worse  than  the disease: rate limiting allows a DoS
>> against  the  service,  no  limit  allows  a  DoS  against the whole
>> machine.
> 
> -s limits number of processes invoked from same IP. You can additionally
> use  -c  to  prevent distributed attack. It doesn't allow to DoS box and
> doesn't disable service for 10 minutes.

Note that my (DEC/Compaq/HP Tru64) inetd does not have -c or -s options.
The only safe way is to use a sensible -R and tcp_wrappers. Or upgrade to
Linux and xinetd...

Cheers,

Paul Szabo - psz@...hs.usyd.edu.au  http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au:8000/u/psz/
School of Mathematics and Statistics  University of Sydney   2006  Australia