Search: Home Bugtraq Vulnerabilities Mailing Lists Jobs Tools Vista
Linux Kernel Security, Again
Jason Miller, 2005-03-16

It's a sad day when an ancient fork bomb attack can still take down most of the latest Linux distributions.

Comments Mode:
silly article 2005-03-17
Anonymous (4 replies)
silly article 2005-03-18
Anonymous
silly response 2005-03-18
Anonymous
silly comment 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
silly article 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Karyl Stein (1 replies)
How can you tell the difference between something like a heavily loaded web server and a fork bomb? In both cases you have a non-root user spawning a number of processes. Is it the job of the distro maintainers to make a judgment on what the user's system can handle? Default process, memory use, and other limits can be set to target what your "typical" modern computer can handle, but your old 486 may still buckle under the load before the limits are reached.

You either have to train users to tweak the limits for their environment, or to set them in the first place. I agree that you want to set certain parameters out of the box, but I think it's more complex than just picking a number out of thin air and applying it as a limit. Besides process limits are not as much of a concern to those running servers that only administrators log in to, or, likewise, desktop users. You don't want to antagonize the bulk of your customers by creating restrictions that may cause them problems.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/308/30966#30966
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Anonymous (3 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (3 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
mrsad (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
crf (2 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-19
CrossChris
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-17
Anonymous (1 replies)
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (3 replies)
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-17
Anonymous
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-17
Anonymous (1 replies)
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (1 replies)
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-18
Stephen Samuel (3 replies)
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-18
Eric F.
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-18
Michael Ayres
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-20
Anonymous
simple fork bomb? 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Todd Knarr
Intended use dictates the limits 2005-03-17
Erik Keller (1 replies)
Intended use dictates the limits 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (4 replies)
Intended use dictates the limits 2005-03-18
Erik Keller (1 replies)
Maybe just use proper distros where needed? 2005-03-20
Michael Shigorin
Intended use dictates the limits 2005-03-23
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Anonymous (2 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-17
Jason V. Miller (Author) (1 replies)
LSM is in the standard kernel. 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-19
PaX Team
Once again... 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
re: Once again... 2005-03-18
editor
Debian not vulnerable? 2005-03-18
Wilmer van der Gaast (2 replies)
Debian not vulnerable? 2005-03-18
k_the_c
Debian not vulnerable? 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Matthew
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Gentoo User (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Another Gentoo User (2 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Gentoo/Debian/OpenBSD user (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Jason V. Miller (Author)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
FreeBSD user (2 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Jason V. Miller (Author)
Debian IS vulnerable! 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Debian IS vulnerable! 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Debian IS vulnerable! 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Get SuSE 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Debian IS vulnerable! 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Gentoo User
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Angel Freire
Gentoo vulnerable? 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
Gentoo vulnerable? 2005-03-18
dk
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Saltine (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Stef (1 replies)
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Jason V. Miller (Author)
Jason's opinion is too biased 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Jason's opinion is too biased 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Jason's opinion is too biased 2005-03-18
Jason V. Miller (Author) (1 replies)
Jason's opinion is too biased 2005-03-23
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Take the first step author. 2005-03-18
EG (2 replies)
Take the first step author. 2005-03-18
Anonymous (1 replies)
Take the first step author. 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Take the first step author. 2005-03-18
Jason V. Miller (Author)
Solution was?... 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Solution was?... 2005-03-18
Anonymous
Solution was?... 2005-03-19
Anonymous
Not quite a valid criticism... 2005-03-18
Anonymous (2 replies)
Not quite a valid criticism... 2005-03-20
darwin lopez
Not quite a valid criticism... 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Silly IDS kid needs to learn C. 2005-03-19
OpenBSD is for Girls
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-19
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-19
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security 2005-03-19
Anonymous
Does it work on Mac OS X? 2005-03-19
huwr
Fresh FreeBSD 5.3 install 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Try, disk I/O and mem. alloc 2005-03-20
Bipin Gautam
Solaris 10 vulnerable, too 2005-03-20
Anonymous
Why its Valid! 2005-03-21
Anonymous
Mandrake 10.1 didn't freeze... 2005-03-21
Anonymous
DEBIAN 2005-03-21
Anonymous (1 replies)
DEBIAN 2005-03-22
Anonymous (1 replies)
DEBIAN 2005-03-23
Lucio
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-23
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-24
Anonymous
PAM 2005-03-24
Maestr0
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-28
Anonymous
Linux Kernel Security, Again 2005-03-29
Anonymous







 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2008, SecurityFocus