Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:47:56 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [Real fix] Re: Kernel panic: can't push onto full stack |
| |
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Alexander Viro wrote: > > >Darn. Screw #4 - it doesn't solve anything. Add #5: block on close() > >(maybe make it an setsockopt()-controllable). BTW, from my reading of > > The attakker can run setsockopt ;). > > Blocking on close looks messy to me. Application suppose that close() > doesn't block indefinetely. If we want to sleep in a usually-not-sleeping Erm? Look at the behaviour in case of AF_INET. If you assume that close doesn't sleep indefinitely your program is broken. Yup, in case of AF_UNIX - somebody had sent you a descriptor of opened and later unlinked file, closed it on his side and when you close the socket GC will involve removal of the inode. That may take *long*.
> path better to sleep in connect() ;).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |