netdev - Re: [PATCH] tcp: ensure non-empty connection request queue

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: <572A39E6.1020001@hpe.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2016 11:05:26 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Peter Wu <peter@...ensteyn.nl>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Kui Zhang <kuizhang@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: ensure non-empty connection request queue

On 05/04/2016 10:34 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 10:24 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
>
>> Dropping the connection attempt makes sense, but is entering/claiming
>> synflood really indicated in the case of a zero-length accept queue?
>
> This is a one time message.
>
> This is how people can learn about their user space bugs, or too small
> backlog ;)
>
> Being totally silent would be not so nice.
>

Assuming Peter's assertion about just drops when syncookies are not 
enabled is accurate, should there be some one-time message in that case too?

rick