Mike Makonnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002 02:35:46 +0400 > Gaspar Chilingarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I've got such situation on our free shellbox set up in the > > university - some newbies were kidding with old while(1) fork(); > > attack. Finnaly they got hit by memory limits set up for each > > user, but anyway they were taking a lot of processor time. I > > prefer to limit some uid's ability to do many forks in some > > short period - like 'no more than 200 forks in 10 seconds' or > > smthng like this. > > Lock them out of the box for a while. If they do it again ban them > forever. The students will learn pretty quickly not to do such things.
He should be able to pick his own administrative policy. > This means less work for you, and no need to continuously maintain diffs > against the kernel sources. IMO it's a *very,very* bad thing to > introduce changes into the kernel that might introduce unintended side > effects when the problem can be solved administratively. Obviously he is intending his changes to be committed; hence, the patches will be applicable to -CURRENT. This is an area where FreeBSD is lacking. I can't understand why you wish to stifle his work. Best regards, Mike Barcroft To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
