netdev - Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:12:58 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 08:28:57AM +0900, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> wrote:
> > 
> > Two quick facts :
> >  - HTTP allows the client to send whatever it wants whenever it wants
> >    and allows the server to close after whatever response it wants.
> >    Thus the server cannot predict that the client will talk.
> 
> No it does not.  Only buggy HTTP clients do that.

I don't agree Herbert. Pipelining consists exactly in that, and is an
encouraged practice. If you say that only buggy clients send an extra
CRLF, then yes I agree. But you might very well get a new request you
can't predict at all, and the arrival of this new request must not 
destroy the end of last response's data.

Once again, for now, I will only handle this precise case of the extra
CRLF, but this will not fix the issue with pipelined requests.

Regards,
Willy

--
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