![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, 30 May 2003 06:02:18 +0200 (CEST), Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes: > On 29 May 2003, Scott A Crosby wrote: > > > I have confirmed via an actual attack that it is possible to force the > > dcache to experience a 200x performance degradation if the attacker can > > control filenames. On a P4-1.8ghz, the time to list a directory of > > 10,000 files is 18 seconds instead of .1 seconds. > > are you sure this is a big issue? Kernel 2.0 (maybe even 2.2) lists 10,000 > files at roughly the same speed (18 seconds) without any attack pattern > used for filenames - still it's a kernel being used. No. Its not that severe, but it does exist, and it is noticable even with a quarter that number of files. I did it because it was an interesting illustrative example, and it only took 30 seconds or so of coding to put the hash function into generator generating program. > So it would take a really specialized attack to keep the dcache size > at the critical level and trigger the slowdown. Yup. It is probably a very unusual configuration, but that doesn't mean that somebody won't experience it. :) Scott - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||