lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Is it possible to give the user the option to cancel forkbombs?
From
Date
I thought you might find this helpful.  (I brought this issue up with
the Slackware folks once, and they told me basically this.)

http://wiki.craz1.homelinux.com/index.php/Linux:Security:Forkbomb

I was also told that the ability to spawn such rampant forks/processes
is controlled by default in Debian. Is this the case?

Here is an LQ thread where I brought it up:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/how-can-i-prevent-forkbombs-338560/

I would like to see something done about this, with Ubuntu as popular as
it is, even as a server in some cases. Is there a way that in the
future, one could simply download a package or click a box or something
and have a limit set, like the links suggest? That would make things
just "that much" more convenient for system administrators (and might
help them/us to remember to set these limits, too...).

Thanks.

-Dane


On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 23:04 -0800, Martin Olsson wrote:
> Sorry about that, I checked the "has security impact" checkbox and that
> marked it as private by default. This is a very well known problem
> though so keeping secret certainly does not make sense. I have manually
> removed the "private" flag now.
>
> The content of the bug report was as follows:
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Repro steps:
>
> 1. Install gutsy gibbon (or probably any ubuntu)
> 2. Start a gnome terminal
> 3. Run this command:
>
> :(){ :|:& };:
>
> 4. Ubuntu starts to work furiously, after less than a second terminal
> gets flooded with "low resources" message, and within a few seconds the
> whole machine breaks down complete to the point where no a single pixel
> is updated and the mouse cannot be moved at all. It's not possible to
> escape to a ALT-Fn console terminal and CTRL-ALT-DEL does not work.
>
> Okay, so this is not as bad as winnuke.exe because it's not remote but I
> just did it on my shared hosting co and their server went down. And I
> mean seriously, there should be a way for a user to abort stuff that
> hogs resources this type of complete breakdown is NEVER acceptible. I
> had to power of the machine and my file system got royally screwed (long
> fsck etc).
>
> Some of you might say this is like the oldest trick in the book, yada
> yada yada...
>
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:51:27 -0800
> > Martin Olsson <mnemo@minimum.se> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear kernel hackers,
> >>
> >> This is a message from below 0x7FFFFFFF. Please look at this bug (it's
> >> not a new concept but still):
> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/163185
> >
> > It seems to want people to register to view it. I guess Ubuntu should fix
> > launchpad then we can see the bug report
> >
> > Alan
> > -
>
>

-
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: 2007-11-17 07:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans