| To: | "Richard B. Johnson" <root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: tcp vulnerability? haven't seen anything on it here... |
| From: | Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 22 Apr 2004 15:17:04 +0200 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.53.0404220734330.8039@chaos> |
| References: | <XFMail.20040422102359.pochini@xxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0404220734330.8039@chaos> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4i |
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:35:54AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > Has anybody checked to see what Linux does if it receives a > RST to the broadcast address? It would be a shame if all > connections were dropped! I don't see how this would be possible : a TCP packet is matched *only* if it refers to a valid session. If you have no session established from/to the broadcast address, there's no possibility that an RST targetted at this address terminates anything, even if the ports are OK. Cheers, Willy |
| Previous by Date: | Re: IMQ / new Dummy device post., jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: tcp vulnerability? haven't seen anything on it here..., Richard B. Johnson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: tcp vulnerability? haven't seen anything on it here..., Richard B. Johnson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: tcp vulnerability? haven't seen anything on it here..., Richard B. Johnson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |