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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 3 Aug 2007 16:09:20 +0400
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
To:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc:	john@...een.lv, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: strange tcp behavior

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 01:03:46PM +0100, Simon Arlott (simon@...e.lp0.eu) wrote:
> On Fri, August 3, 2007 12:56, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 12:21:46PM +0100, Simon Arlott (simon@...e.lp0.eu) wrote:
> >> Since the connection is considered closed, couldn't another socket re-use it?
> >>
> >> Socket A: Recv data (unread)
> >> Socket A: Recv RST
> >> Socket B: Reuses connection (same IPs/ports)
> >> Socket A: Close
> >>
> >> Wouldn't that disrupt socket B's use of the connection?
> >
> > Then it will drop our data, since there were no appropriate handhsake.
> 
> Couldn't the sequence numbers be close enough to make the RST valid?

It does not matter - if connection is not in synchronized state all
unrelated data is dropped, so remote side is only allowed to receive syn
flag only, anything else must be dropped. If remote side does not do
that, it violates RFC.

> -- 
> Simon Arlott

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ