linux-kernel - Re: Finding a hidden bound TCP socket

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]

Message-Id: <20111123.160143.58902472755124590.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:01:43 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	gdfuego@...il.com
Cc:	richard.weinberger@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Finding a hidden bound TCP socket

From: "G. D. Fuego" <gdfuego@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:27:33 -0500

> Any comments?  The behavior seems broken.  At the very least its very
> inconsistent with other Unixes.

Until the socket has a full final tuple it is bound to, there is no
reason to list it.

No UNIX lists a socket which is partially bound and hasn't either
performed a listen() or a connect().

Nobody has any comments because nobody thinks it's worth worrying about.
--
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/