From: Pau Espin Pedrol
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:30:34 +0200
> RFC 5961 advises to only accept RST packets containing a seq number
> matching the next expected seq number instead of the whole receive
> window in order to avoid spoofing attacks.
>
> However, this situation is not optimal in the c
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 16:30 +0200, Pau Espin Pedrol wrote:
>> RFC 5961 advises to only accept RST packets containing a seq number
>> matching the next expected seq number instead of the whole receive
>> window in order to avoid spoofing attack
On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 16:30 +0200, Pau Espin Pedrol wrote:
> RFC 5961 advises to only accept RST packets containing a seq number
> matching the next expected seq number instead of the whole receive
> window in order to avoid spoofing attacks.
> Signed-off-by: Pau Espin Pedrol
Acked-by: Eric Duma
RFC 5961 advises to only accept RST packets containing a seq number
matching the next expected seq number instead of the whole receive
window in order to avoid spoofing attacks.
However, this situation is not optimal in the case SACK is in use at the
time the RST is sent. I recently run into a sce
The functionality seems OK to me, though there are some
style/formatting issues, which checkpatch.pl picks up:
> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
> net-next-tcp-accept-RST-if-SEQ-matches-right-edge-of-right-most-SACK-block.patch
WARNING: line over 80 characters
#73: FILE: net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:5199:
+
RFC 5961 advises to only accept RST packets containing a seq number
matching the next expected seq number instead of the whole receive
window in order to avoid spoofing attacks.
However, this situation is not optimal in the case SACK is in use at the
time the RST is sent. I recently run into a sce
