"MD5 Hash NOT expected but found" ..

"MD5 Hash NOT expected but found" ..

[Matti Aarnio]

Dmesg reports following on  2.6.26-0.45.rc4.git2.fc10.x86_64



MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4730)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4730)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4729)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1223)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1223)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 3316)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1169)->(212.16.98.133, 25)

Re: "MD5 Hash NOT expected but found" ..

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:04:30 +0300
Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org> wrote:

> Dmesg reports following on  2.6.26-0.45.rc4.git2.fc10.x86_64
> 
> 
> 
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4730)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4730)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.208.8, 4729)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1223)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1223)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 3316)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (69.29.200.106, 1169)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Somebody is trying to connect with MD5 option.
This kernel message is too verbose for production systems.

Re: "MD5 Hash NOT expected but found" ..

[Adam Langley]

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Hemminger
<shemminger@vyatta.com> wrote:
> Somebody is trying to connect with MD5 option.

The message was there before the rework in net-2.6 and so I kept it at the time.

> This kernel message is too verbose for production systems.

Another person has expressed the same opinion and, in my current code,
I've already removed it. I'll submit a patch. If someone had a good
reason for including it in the first place they can speak up.


Cheers

AGL

-- 
Adam Langley agl@imperialviolet.org http://www.imperialviolet.org

Re: "MD5 Hash NOT expected but found" ..

[Matti Aarnio]

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:16:15AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:04:30 +0300
> Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org> wrote:
> 
> > Dmesg reports following on  2.6.26-0.45.rc4.git2.fc10.x86_64
> > 
> > MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> > MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (207.118.50.124, 4463)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> > MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
> > MD5 Hash NOT expected but found (64.91.108.168, 3704)->(212.16.98.133, 25)
...
> 
> Somebody is trying to connect with MD5 option.
> This kernel message is too verbose for production systems.

Probably yes.  I have seen those kernel messages less frequently than
once per day on average.   "Rule of Least Confusion" does suggest that
unless this really reports about something being wrong, it should not
report it  --  if it is generated because the coder was unsure of what
will happen, then the kernel needs more pacthing.

Current server uptime is 54 days, which means the kernel may have
already been patched somehow regarding this.

/Matti Aarnio