netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Possible ip_defrag DoS ?
       [not found]       ` <3E4F8660.5020409@trash.net>
@ 2003-02-16 20:11         ` Harald Welte
  2003-02-16 20:26           ` Patrick McHardy
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Harald Welte @ 2003-02-16 20:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Patrick McHardy; +Cc: Don Cohen, netfilter-devel, netdev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1023 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 01:38:56PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:

> inerestingly, it seems linux defragmentation is vulnerable to dos attack.
> the evictor (called before defragmentation) just kills the oldest entry
> of each hash slot, starting with 0 until memory is below
> sysctl_ipfrag_low_thresh. by sending enough fragments 
> (>sysctl_ipfrag_high_thresh) which hash to the highest bucket you can
> stop reassembly of valid packets.

I'm forwarding this (from netfilter-devel) to the linux networking
developers at netdev@oss.sgi.com.  If your assumption is valid, they
might want to have a look at this...

thanks.

> Patrick

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>             http://www.netfilter.org/
============================================================================
  "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
   architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
   on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: Possible ip_defrag DoS ?
  2003-02-16 20:11         ` Possible ip_defrag DoS ? Harald Welte
@ 2003-02-16 20:26           ` Patrick McHardy
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Patrick McHardy @ 2003-02-16 20:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Harald Welte; +Cc: Don Cohen, netfilter-devel, netdev

Harald Welte wrote:

>On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 01:38:56PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>  
>
>>inerestingly, it seems linux defragmentation is vulnerable to dos attack.
>>the evictor (called before defragmentation) just kills the oldest entry
>>of each hash slot, starting with 0 until memory is below
>>sysctl_ipfrag_low_thresh. by sending enough fragments 
>>(>sysctl_ipfrag_high_thresh) which hash to the highest bucket you can
>>stop reassembly of valid packets.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm forwarding this (from netfilter-devel) to the linux networking
>developers at netdev@oss.sgi.com.  If your assumption is valid, they
>might want to have a look at this...
>
>thanks.
>
>
>  
>
Hi Harald, it seems this was not (entirely) correct, the evictor only 
kills the last
member of each hash slot and then moves on. still, assuming the hash 
function is good
there is a good chance we can disturb reassembly noticeable.

Patrick

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-02-16 20:26 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20030215232635.25928.78900.Mailman@kashyyyk>
     [not found] ` <15950.60635.389199.836425@isis.cs3-inc.com>
     [not found]   ` <3E4F0881.70302@trash.net>
     [not found]     ` <15951.10496.914173.716313@isis.cs3-inc.com>
     [not found]       ` <3E4F8660.5020409@trash.net>
2003-02-16 20:11         ` Possible ip_defrag DoS ? Harald Welte
2003-02-16 20:26           ` Patrick McHardy

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).