netdev - Re: [PATCH V2] net: add accounting for socket backlog

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: <1267409328.23196.37.camel@debian>
Date:	Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:08:48 +0800
From:	Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...el.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"eric.dumazet@...il.com" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] net: add accounting for socket backlog

On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 20:05 +0800, David Miller wrote:
> So remind me why TCP, or any other non-UDP protocol, won't
> intrinsically have this problem too?

If TCP ACKs are not received, the (closed) remote window prevents the
TCP sender to send more frames.

> It seems pretty trivial to do with any protocol, especially remotely,
> with a packet generator.  The code in TCP, for example, which queues
> to the backlog, doesn't care about sequence numbers or anything like
> that.
> 
> So you could spray a machine with the same TCP frame over and over
> again, as fast as possible, as long as it matches the socket identity.
> 
> And in this way fill up the backlog endlessly and OOM the system. 

Yeah, I only considered about the normal case, that is the TCP frames
are built and managed in the kernel. If a user does frame generation
himself, yes, the same problem could happen potentially for all
protocols using backlog.

Thanks,
-yi

--
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