On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 10:55:05PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> ... an idea would be to add some limit to limit the number of processes
> forked by a process (at one time in addition to the number of processes
> by user which may be relative to the system wide limit
> (maxprocperproc=nproc-10).
On 10 Jul 2000, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> some time ago, I had a similar problem. too many processes forked, power off...
> reboot impossible. the cause of this problem was to define nisdomainname w/
> activating nis services. so portmap give up thoses processes to log errors
> messages because it
Narvi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [i think this might just as well belong in -questions]
>
> On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I'm 18-year-old newbie UNIX programmer that currently use
> > FreeBSD and is really thankfull of it.I run it on DUAL PII/333.
> >
> > Some days ago my fri
> This DoS is probably as old as you are. :) Setting proper limits on
Older. I did this back in the spring of 1977 at Reed College (v6/PWB)- after
beating me up for crashing the system, they gave me superuser privileges so
that if I did something like it again *I* could then spend the two hours
Please, this is not a topic for arch. While I appreciate the author's
intent, it is indeed "old news", well known and for which we have a
specific set of solutions.
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_DES: Th
[i think this might just as well belong in -questions]
On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello
>
> I'm 18-year-old newbie UNIX programmer that currently use
> FreeBSD and is really thankfull of it.I run it on DUAL PII/333.
>
> Some days ago my friend tell me that with simple user righ
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Well, IMHO I think something like this implemented in the kernel for
> the reasons given above would let people write bad code.
Yup, that clinches it for me. You're right. This would have fallen
more into the catagory of "bad program design fix" rathe
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
> > > Perhaps a discussion of something like FORK_RATELIMIT along the lines
> > > of ICMP_BANDLIM is in order?
> >
> > why would you do that? If something wants t
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
> > Perhaps a discussion of something like FORK_RATELIMIT along the lines
> > of ICMP_BANDLIM is in order?
>
> why would you do that? If something wants to fork, let it fork. When
> it hits the upper limit defin
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
> On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Some days ago my friend tell me that with simple user rights
> > and whit only 1 line of code he could crash my machine. I laught
> > but he did it :(.
> >
> > What he wrote was ' int main(void) {while(1) fork
On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Some days ago my friend tell me that with simple user rights
> and whit only 1 line of code he could crash my machine. I laught
> but he did it :(.
>
> What he wrote was ' int main(void) {while(1) fork(); }' compiled it
> and run it. Within a second /kern
On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What he wrote was ' int main(void) {while(1) fork(); }' compiled it
> and run it. Within a second /kernel said "proc: table is full" and
> died. I tried this on some other BSD unixes and the result was
> same.
A fork() bomb... Resource exhaustion. Old
Hello
I'm 18-year-old newbie UNIX programmer that currently use
FreeBSD and is really thankfull of it.I run it on DUAL PII/333.
Some days ago my friend tell me that with simple user rights
and whit only 1 line of code he could crash my machine. I laught
but he did it :(.
What he wrote was ' i
13 matches
Mail list logo
