Re[4]: 11 years of inetd default insecurity?

[3APA3A <3APA3A () security nnov ru>]

Hello Paul,

Monday, September 8, 2003, 11:11:12 PM, you wrote:

> > -s limits number of processes invoked from same IP. You can additionally
> > use  -c  to  prevent distributed attack. It doesn't allow to DoS box and
> > doesn't disable service for 10 minutes.

PS> Note that my (DEC/Compaq/HP Tru64) inetd does not have -c or -s options.
PS> The only safe way is to use a sensible -R and tcp_wrappers. Or upgrade to
PS> Linux and xinetd...

It  proofs code needs to be rewritten. I don't understand why limitation
is  on  per  minute,  not per second base. Oh no - I understand. This is
result  of  the  code  was  written  more  than 10 years ago. But what I
completely  misunderstand  is  how  disabling  service  for  10  minutes
increases security. It's because I'm green, stupid and brain damaged.

IMHO  reasonable  behavior is limiting a number of requests accepted per
second  without  disabling service. But this code became a kind of saint
cow.  Only hope is young monsters like xinetd will rid this dinosaur off
as a result of evolution.

-- 
/3APA3A