From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] net: add accounting for socket backlog Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:10:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20100228.181010.211259500.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1267176464-426-1-git-send-email-yi.zhu@intel.com> <20100226.040536.247057194.davem@davemloft.net> <1267409328.23196.37.camel@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com To: yi.zhu@intel.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:38319 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753357Ab0CACJw (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Feb 2010 21:09:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1267409328.23196.37.camel@debian> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Zhu Yi Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:08:48 +0800 > Yeah, I only considered about the normal case, that is the TCP frames > are built and managed in the kernel. You're not even considering the kernel case completely. It's just as easy to modify the kernel to maliciously send frames in this way. > If a user does frame generation himself, yes, the same problem could > happen potentially for all protocols using backlog. We need the protection for every protocol, please implement your changes this way. Thanks.