From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935378Ab3BOFbD (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:31:03 -0500 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:44773 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751592Ab3BOFbA (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:31:00 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Kees Cook Cc: Stephen Hemminger , LKML , Rob Landley , "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , James Morris , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Patrick McHardy , Eric Dumazet , Neil Horman , Yuchung Cheng , Shan Wei , "linux-doc\@vger.kernel.org" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Willy Tarreau References: <20130207175240.GA12520@www.outflux.net> <20130207103950.662698ea@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 21:30:41 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Kees Cook's message of "Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:44:02 -0800") Message-ID: <87y5eq87pa.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+pJ3rzDzK3npF/DJNnEFSXxTpEmpXstJ8= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.153.68 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0002] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.5 XM_Body_Dirty_Words Contains a dirty word X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Kees Cook X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: sysctl to disable TCP simultaneous connect X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kees Cook writes: > The patch would not break it -- it defaults the sysctl to staying enabled. > > If you mean the documentation should be updated, sure, that's easy to do. > > David: I know you aren't a fan of this patch, but I'd like to try to > convince you. :) This leaves the feature enabled and add a toggle for > systems (like Chrome OS) that don't want to risk this DoS at all. > There are so very many other toggle, I don't see why this one would be > a problem to add. Chrome OS has no plans to implement webrtc? Last I had read that support had been added to the release versions of Chrome, and was in the development builds of firefox. I really don't belive that there are many systems that don't intend to run a web browser. Eric