Re: Alternate port randomization approaches

From: Maxim Konovalov (maxim_at_macomnet.ru)
Date: 12/19/04

  • Next message: Andre Oppermann: "Re: Dingo and PerForce" 
    Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:21:23 +0300 (MSK)
To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>

    Hi Mike,

    On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, 04:03-0600, Mike Silbersack wrote:

    [...]
    > Although this isn't a perfect fix, I think that it should be
    > acceptable for the vast majority of systems, and I'd like to get it
    > in before 4.11-release ships. To be conservative, I'll probably
    > choose a value like 5, which should be fine for most systems out
    > there. Super specialized users will always be able to lower it to
    > 0.

    Can we leave it zero by default? I affraid this patch won't get much
    testing before 4.11-REL. The super specialized users will always be
    able to set net.inet.ip.portrange.randomized whatever they want to.

    The next thing I am worry about - some users already have
    net.inet.ip.portrange.randomized=1 in their /etc/sysctl.conf and now
    we are going to change a meaning of this sysctl. Can we garantee
    there are no any side effects with this setting?

    I failed to find the documentation part of your patch also :-) 

    -- 
Maxim Konovalov
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Andre Oppermann: "Re: Dingo and PerForce"