netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: T/TCP Problems can be solved.

To: Laurence <laudney@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: T/TCP Problems can be solved.
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:25:23 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <200202140407.g1E47f915138@oss.sgi.com>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Your subject sounds exciting; i almost thought you invented
something new; I read it and was disapointed to find you are just
sounding like a salivating marketeer.
BTW, fix you eol

On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Laurence wrote:

> On mlists.linux.kernel, on comp.os.linux.development.sys, I keep hearing from 
> people who say T/TCP is fundamentally broken because it has various serious 
> flaws:
> 1. T/TCP guesses an unreasonable window size (4k) for its peer and sends SYN 
> with data accordingly.
>
> It can be easily changed into 2*MSS, which is used in standard TCP 
> implementations.
>

Less data to chew on ;->

> 2. T/TCP has great potential for DoS attacks.
>
> Because T/TCP sends data along with first SYN, ttcp is more vulnerable
> to DoS attacks. But, if ttcp queues the data only TAO succeeds and
> discards it if TAO fails, this problem
> can be greatly lessened. Adding some host
> validation methods may fully solve this problem.
>

How can a packet that carries data have the same effect in terms
of compute power and mem abuse as one that doesnt?

> 3. T/TCP has great potential for r-* services attacks.
>
> TCP also has it! It's always recommended that r-* be
> turned off. And r-* is being replaced by SSH etc. Besides, ttcp sends

So lets kill those applications so that T/TCP can live

>packets with PUSH flag. r-* refuses any packet with PUSH flag. So, there
> should be no problem.
>

>
>
> FreeBSD integrates ttcp in its kernel. This can be a strong evidence
> about ttcp's applicability.

bullshit.

> T/TCP is considered flawed mainly because RFC 1644 doesn't consider
> security  problems. It definitely needs improvements. A new RFC is
> necessary at the end.

So far any of your arguements above dont prove a thing.

> What I'm going to do is to implement a "basic" ttcp patch based on RFC 1644. 
> Then, when people download the patch and test it, I'll collect every posted 
> problems along with it and modify the patch accordingly. During the same 
> process, I'll find out what improvements are needed for RFC 1644 and draft a 
> new one.
>
> So, I hope people don't simply discard TTCP. Anyway, there will be more 
> benefits for all of us if TTCP is fixed instead of being thrown away. I can't 
> do that alone without your support and help.
> Thanks.
>

Look, nobody is going to stop you from implementing things; have fun
while doing it. Trying to sell used cars wont help you very much.

cheers,
jamal



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>