+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
* Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org [2009-06-22 04:30]:
wouldnt limiting the number of simultanous connections from one IP
already help? F.e. something like:
http://gpl.net.ua/modipcount/downloads.html
Not only would this be futile against the Slowloris attack (imagine n
connections from n
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi Andreas,
Andreas Krennmair schrieb:
For those who are still unaware of the Slowloris attack, it's a
denial-of-service attack that consumes Apache's resources by opening up
a great number of parallel connections and slowly sending partial
attack including a PoC
(moved to dev@ - as this issue is now perfectly public).
Ben Laurie wrote:
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
Ben Laurie wrote:
What does that matter? If you need to do it less to Apache, then Apache
is broken in comparison to the others.
Completely agreed - no need to get into a spitting match
Hi,
I encountered the following problem with Apache HTTPD on Windows:
* lets suppose that server root is C:\ABC\XYZ\root;
* httpd service have all appropriate access permissions
for the server root;
* but httpd service doesn't have any access permission for
the parents of the root. E.g. httpd
Andreas Krennmair wrote:
* Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org [2009-06-22 04:30]:
wouldnt limiting the number of simultanous connections from one IP
already help? F.e. something like:
http://gpl.net.ua/modipcount/downloads.html
Not only would this be futile against the Slowloris attack
Ivan Zhakov wrote:
I encountered the following problem with Apache HTTPD on Windows:
* lets suppose that server root is C:\ABC\XYZ\root;
* httpd service have all appropriate access permissions
for the server root;
* but httpd service doesn't have any access permission for
the parents
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ivan Zhakov wrote:
* is it possible to remove APR_FILEPATH_TRUENAME argument in the trunk
of Apache HTTP Server? (see attached patch)
-1, veto for such a change.
Change this and httpd and even third party modules can ultimately discover
their configuration
Hi All,
I need to build mod_proxy by source rather than enable in the
configuration. I dont know how to build it by apxs as it has two dependent
files (proxy_util.c and mod_proxy.c) .Please help me to over come this
problem.
Best Regards,
Iroshan
Under Graduate-UCSC
Sri Lanka
apxs -c -o mod_proxy.so mod_proxy.c proxy_util.c
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:00 PM, h iroshan iroshanm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I need to build mod_proxy by source rather than enable in the
configuration. I dont know how to build it by apxs as it has two dependent
files (proxy_util.c and
hi Kevac Marko,
Thank you very much.
hi Kevac Marko,
apxs -c -o mod_proxy.so mod_proxy.c proxy_util.c
above command not generate mod_proxy.so . Please help me
Regards
Iroshan
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 02:23:12PM +0200, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
-Seriously rewrite apache/add a worker which mimics the
accept_filter.ko
of freebsd somewhat in that it as a single threaded async select()
loop
which buffers things up until they are cooked enough (i.e. the
Look:
$ ~/micex/opt/httpd-worker/bin/apxs -c -o mod_proxy.so mod_proxy.c
proxy_util.c
/home/marko/micex/opt/httpd-worker/build/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc
-prefer-pic -g -DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE -pthread
-I/home/marko/micex/opt/httpd-worker/include
Hi,
How about coding a module looking how many bytes are read and if there
is too little chunk of data, close the connection.
Something like a MinDataReadSize. If the read() function read too little
data, close() the socket... Dunno if it's possible to hook directly in
connection hook to do
William A. Rowe, Jr. at 2009-6-23 2:00 wrote:
Andreas Krennmair wrote:
* Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org [2009-06-22 04:30]:
wouldnt limiting the number of simultanous connections from one IP
already help? F.e. something like:
http://gpl.net.ua/modipcount/downloads.html
Not
2009/6/23 Weibin Yao nbubi...@gmail.com:
William A. Rowe, Jr. at 2009-6-23 2:00 wrote:
Andreas Krennmair wrote:
* Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org [2009-06-22 04:30]:
wouldnt limiting the number of simultanous connections from one IP
already help? F.e. something like:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Andreas Krennmaira...@synflood.at wrote:
Hello everyone,
.
The basic principle is that the timeout for new connections is adjusted
according to the current load on the Apache instance: a load percentage is
computed in the perform_idle_server_maintenance()
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Graham
Dumpletongraham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/23 Weibin Yao nbubi...@gmail.com:
William A. Rowe, Jr. at 2009-6-23 2:00 wrote:
Andreas Krennmair wrote:
* Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org [2009-06-22 04:30]:
wouldnt limiting the number of
19 matches
Mail list logo
