From: jhigdon <jhigdon@nni.com>
To: Ryan Underwood <nemesis-lists@icequake.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Forking shell bombs
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:23:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F0B1A39.8010801@nni.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030708184537.GJ1030@dbz.icequake.net>
Ryan Underwood wrote:
>Hi,
>
>:(){ :|:&};:
>
>Paste that into bash and watch linux die. (2.4.21 stock)
>
>I've seen some methods of dealing with infinitely forking processes, but
>short of solving the Halting Problem I doubt we will ever find a perfect
>solution to _preventing_ them. So I had a few ideas that might help an
>admin _deal_ with a fork storm when it is occurring so that the S-U-B
>approach can be avoided.
>
>I also found it interesting that alt-sysrq-S took about 5 minutes to
>complete the sync. Is there some sort of priority issue there? I would
>think that kernel operations should forget about all the little annoying
>processes going crazy. Also, eventually, the OOM killer started killing
>off stuff, but I noticed that it would repeatedly attempt to kill the
>same pid, such as gpm's pid, up to 10 times or so. Was it not getting
>enough CPU time to die, or something?
>
>Anyway, here are my half-baked ideas, maybe someone else has more
>suggestions:
>
>1) Alt-SysRq-<x>- then type the name of a process and hit enter. All
>processes matching this name are killed. Drawback -- if you use this to
>kill e.g. bash, all your login shells will die too, putting a desktop
>user back at a login prompt. This is ok for servers, not for desktops.
>This would solve shell bombs but not compiled bombs -- a process would
>just overwrite argv[0] after it forks with random gibberish to defeat
>it.
>
>2) Alt-SysRq-<x> - Kill all processes that share the most popular
>process size in the system table. This way even if the name is changed,
>if there is a process making infinite copies of itself, since all the
>processes are carrying out the same action, they may have the same size.
>This is speculation and may be wrong.
>
>3) Alt-SysRq-<x> - Kill the process that has the most descendent
>processes. This could be made "smart" so that it only kills off the
>part of the process tree where it really starts branching off, which
>is a likely candidate for where the fork bomb started.
>
>4) Since processes are created with increasing pids, a "killall" against
>a fork bomb does nothing. It simply starts killing processes matching
>that name starting at the lowest pid. But the processes which are
>forking at higher pids eventually wrap around and get lower pids again,
>which makes you end up with a forkbomb ring buffer. Not too effective
>at getting rid of the problem.
>
>What about some sort of reverse killall, or a killall with specific
>capabilities tailored to taking out fork bombs? My roommate suggested
>perhaps a "killall-bomb" may be in order. A killall that forks
>infinitely just like the bomb does, but also works to kill off the bomb
>by filling up the process table itself. Eventually the predators should
>exhaust their prey, and then expire themselves with nothing left to eat.
>
>5) Alt-SysRq-<x> - Until this key combination is pressed again, when a
>process tries to fork(), kill it instead. After a couple seconds, all
>the forking annoyances should be gone. You may lose some legitimate
>processes who try to fork within that interval, but you will most likely
>retain control of your system with little interruption. (?)
>
>6) A fork flag in a process header? Perhaps like the digital copy
>flag to impose restrictions on consumer devices, a process should only
>be allowed to fork a set number of times before any further fork returns
>-1.
>
>When I am in sysadmin mode, the very last thing on earth I want to do is
>admit defeat to errant programs running on my system. Perhaps the Linux
>kernel can be made more resilient to fork bomb behavior in the first
>place, but if not, it would certainly help to be able to take care of
>the problem once it is already happening, aside from a punch of the reset
>button.
>
>Comments appreciated!
>
>See ya,
>
>
It's a base redhat kernel, after the cannot allocate memory, my system
returned to normal operation and it didnt die.
Is this the type of behavior you were looking for? or am i off base?
Linux sloth 2.4.20-8 #1 Thu Mar 13 17:54:28 EST 2003 i686 i686 i386
GNU/Linux
$ :(){ :|:&};:
[1] 3071
$
[1]+ Done : | :
$ -bash: fork: Cannot allocate memory
-bash: fork: Cannot allocate memory
-bash: fork: Cannot allocate memory
-bash: fork: Cannot allocate memory
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-08 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-08 18:45 Forking shell bombs Ryan Underwood
2003-07-08 18:55 ` Charles Cazabon
2003-07-08 22:01 ` Alan Cox
2003-07-08 19:23 ` jhigdon [this message]
2003-07-08 20:35 ` vlad
[not found] <20030708193401.24226.95499.Mailman@lists.us.dell.com>
2003-07-08 20:28 ` Ryan Underwood
2003-07-08 20:37 ` vlad
2003-07-08 20:43 ` jhigdon
2003-07-08 21:25 ` Ryan Underwood
2003-07-08 22:43 ` Sir Ace
2003-07-09 15:07 ` David Ford
2003-07-09 21:10 ` Ryan Underwood
2003-07-13 9:10 ` Riley Williams
2003-07-13 9:40 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-07-13 14:17 ` Gene Heskett
2003-07-08 21:59 ` system_lists
2003-07-08 17:18 ` Max Valdez
2003-07-08 22:25 ` Alan Cox
2003-07-08 22:26 ` Svein Ove Aas
2003-07-08 22:51 ` Ryan Underwood
2003-07-10 12:32 ` Luiz Capitulino
2003-07-08 23:05 ` Wakko Warner
2003-07-09 11:36 ` Michael Buesch
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-08 22:26 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-07-09 11:05 Arvind Kandhare
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F0B1A39.8010801@nni.com \
--to=jhigdon@nni.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nemesis-lists@icequake.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.