| To: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: syncookie monsters ? |
| From: | Petru Paler <ppetru@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:39:48 +0200 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200102161936.WAA07225@ms2.inr.ac.ru>; from kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru on Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 10:36:52PM +0300 |
| References: | <20010216210024.B1900@ppetru.net> <200102161936.WAA07225@ms2.inr.ac.ru> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.14i |
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 10:36:52PM +0300, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > So, what is the actual truth ? Are syncookies good to use for > > loaded servers ? > > Provided server is configured so that sending cookies is never > triggered and considering each event of triggering syncookies > as sign of misconfiguration rather than an attack. So they have no use in defeating SYN flood attacks ? -- Petru Paler, mailto:ppetru@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.ppetru.net - ICQ: 41817235 |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: syncookie monsters ?, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: syncookie monsters ?, kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: syncookie monsters ?, kuznet |
| Next by Thread: | Re: syncookie monsters ?, kuznet |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |