On Nov 30, 2007 5:52 PM, Chris Snook <csnook@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Zhukov Pavel wrote: > > why modern fedora affected by simple forkbomb attack? > > > > Because it's hard to set static defaults that are reasonable for both a low-end > laptop and a 16-core server with 128 GB of RAM. Theoretically we could > configure the defaults in limits.conf dynamically at installation time, but no > one has ever cared enough to write the code and test it on the wide range of > hardware and software configurations required to get it right. > > Personally, I find the current settings work just fine. The only way I can > forkbomb my old 384 MB, 1-core powerbook is with a synthetic forkbomb, and the > fix for it is "don't do that". It survives an accidental forkbomb, such as > those caused by foolish application handler settings. If you're running > arbitrary code from untrusted users, a forkbomb is the least of your problems. > On my 2-core, 2 GB systems, which is a reasonable minimum target for interactive > servers allowing logins by semi-trusted users, I can't even synthetically > forkbomb the box without root privileges. The most I can do is lock up my X > server, which is cured by a remote ssh and a kill. This might be what's > happening to you. > > If you think there's something really wrong, please open a bug with specifics. > > -- Chris > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > hm. for example, can i keep in reserve for example 5% of system resources for root user? i just successfully DoS C2D5600/2GB laptop with simple :(){ :|:& };: :( -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
