linux-kernel - Re: Bad ext3/nfs DoS bug

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:	Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:22:16 +0200
From:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:	James <20@...ingley.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bad ext3/nfs DoS bug

Hi James,

> > so I used your exploit and I could reproduce it on every 2.6 kernel, I
> > tried so far. 
> 
> That must have been a lot of fscks.

it wasn't that many. For some obvious reasons I only tested the RHEL and
Fedora kernels and vanilla plus stable series.

> > However with a 2.4 kernel I see the error messages, but it
> > doesn't get remounted read-only. Did you run tests with 2.4 kernels?
> 
> no, I don't have any to hand, but someone is preparing one
> now. Is NFS subtree checking on by default in 2.4?

I haven't checked within the code, but the manual page exports(5) states
subtree checking as being on by default. And it doesn't mention any
difference to 2.4 kernels.

What is the reason behind your question? Does disabling subtree checking
changes something?

Regards

Marcel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/