From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Denis Vlasenko Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix small DoS on connect() (was Re: BUG: Unusual TCP Connect() results.) Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:47:07 +0300 Message-ID: <200506122047.07257.vda@ilport.com.ua> References: <42A9C607.4030209@unixtrix.com> <200506122010.33075.vda@ilport.com.ua> <20050612173614.GA11157@alpha.home.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , xschmi00@stud.feec.vutbr.cz, alastair@unixtrix.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Willy Tarreau In-Reply-To: <20050612173614.GA11157@alpha.home.local> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sunday 12 June 2005 20:36, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:10:33PM +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > > Does it seem appropriate for mainline ? In this case, I would also backport > > > it to 2.4 and send it to you for inclusion. > > > > It does not contain a comment why it is configurable. > > You're right. Better with this ? Very nice. BTW, is there any real world applications which ever used this? > + If you want backwards compatibility with every possible application, > + you should set it to 1. If you prefer to enhance security on your > + systems at the risk of breaking very rare specific applications, you'd > + better let it to 0. > + Default: 0 This text leaves an impression that they exist. -- vda