lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Patch related with Fork Bombing Atack
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Anand Jahagirdar wrote:

> I am forwarding one improved patch related with Fork Bombing
> Attack. This patch prints a message (only once) which alerts
> administrator/root user about fork bombing attack. I created this patch
> to implement my idea of informing administrator about fork bombing
> attack on his machine only once.
> This patch overcomes all drawbacks of my previous patch related with
> fork bombing attack and helps administrator. added comments will
> definitely help developers.

> + /*
> + * following code prints a message which alerts administrator/root * user about fork bombing Attack
> + */
> + if ((atomic_read(&p->user->processes) >= (p->signal->rlim [RLIMIT_NPROC].rlim_cur - 1)) && (atomic_read(&p->user->processes) < p->signal->rlim[RLIMIT_NPROC].rlim_cur)) {

Did this get malformed somehow? Looks like some successive lines got
pasted together, or something.

> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) && !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) && p->user != &root_user) {
> + printk(KERN_CRIT"User with uid %d is crossing its Process limit\n",p->user->uid);
> + }
> + }

Why not printk_ratelimit() here? Otherwise we have looped back to the
possibility of user flooding the system logs, which has been already
discussed in this thread, right?

Also the { and } braces seem redundant.
Thanks,

--
Jiri Kosina
-
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: 2007-06-04 17:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans