| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49E774B1.5060505@nortel.com> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:10:57 -0600 From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com> To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> CC: Greg Kurz <gkurz@...ibm.com>, Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>, Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, containers@...ts.osdl.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: C/R without "leaks" Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:42:17AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: >> On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:56 +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > >>> There are sockets and live netns as the most complex example. I'm not >>> prepared to describe it exactly, but people wishing to do C/R with >>> "leaks" should be very careful with their wishes. >> They should close their sockets before checkpoint and find/have some way >> to reconnect after. This implies some kind of C/R awareness in the code >> to be checkpointed. > > How do you imagine sshd closing sockets and reconnecting? Don't you already have to handle the case where an sshd connection is checkpointed, then the system is shutdown and the restore doesn't happen until after the TCP timeout? Chris -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists