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: <20090509154515.28251a48@nehalam>
Date:	Sat, 9 May 2009 15:45:15 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ports beeing reused too fast

On Sat, 9 May 2009 15:31:35 -0400
Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 09 May 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > Octavian Purdila a écrit :
> > > On Saturday 09 May 2009 09:58:25 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > 
> > >>> I've looked over the  code and it looks right, so maybe net_random() is
> > >>> not random enough? Or maybe there are side effects because of the %
> > >>> port_range?
> > >> Random is random :)
> > >> Probability a port can be reused pretty fast is not nul.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > Thinking again about it... you are right :)
> > > 
> > >> So yes, behavior you discovered is expected, when we switched port
> > >> selection from a sequential one (not very secure btw) to a random one.
> > >>
> > >> Any strong reason why a firewall would drop a SYN because ports were used
> > >> in a previous session ?
> > > 
> > > We don't know why the firewall (Cisco FWSM) is dropping the packets, may be a 
> > > bug, limitation or miss-configuration. We are trying to track this down with 
> > > the firewall vendor.
> > 
> > Normally, the client machine should not reuse a port during the TIME_WAIT duration
> > (TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN being 60 seconds on linux). Port selection being random or sequential,
> > it should avoid all ports recently used.
> > 
> > Maybe this firewall has a longer TIME_WAIT enforcement (something like 2 minutes)
> 
> But he had 19 ports being reused after only 1000 connect()s, which
> with his stated ~360 (I'm assuming per second) connection rate,
> would only take about 3 seconds.
> 
> 						-Bill

This the same thing as the Birthday paradox

-- 
--
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