On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 02:21, Kevin 'ldir' Darbyshire-Bryant
wrote:
>
> > On 14 Apr 2021, at 00:34, Simon Kelley wrote:
> >
> > Tagging onto the end of the thread just to report the results of my
> > research.
> >
> > This started because of problems with the OOM killer in a
> >
> On 14 Apr 2021, at 00:34, Simon Kelley wrote:
>
> Tagging onto the end of the thread just to report the results of my
> research.
>
> This started because of problems with the OOM killer in a
> resource-constrained system that was prompting OOM death when it spawned
> sub-processes to
>
> Hey Simon,
>
> On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 23:55 +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> > I could do with a handle on exactly how people are configuring dnsmasq
> > to do ad blocking. It's not something I have much experience of.
>
> The situation for Pi-hole (a popular ad blocker based on dnsmasq) is the
>
Am 02.04.2021 um 10:56 schrieb Kevin 'ldir' Darbyshire-Bryant:
The adblock package solution on openwrt (I’m being specific ‘cos there are a
number of ‘adblock’ solutions with ‘adblock’ name :-)
Deny uses 'address=/foo.bar/‘ to block ‘foo.bar’ and ‘*.foo.bar'
Such a definition is put in a
Hey Simon,
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 23:55 +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> I could do with a handle on exactly how people are configuring dnsmasq
> to do ad blocking. It's not something I have much experience of.
The situation for Pi-hole (a popular ad blocker based on dnsmasq) is the
following:
>
> One other thing I saw while testing with large blocklists was a noticeable
> latency increase, likely related to lookup times. I recall some discussion
> on the ML where you mentioned work on a hash/tree solution was in
> progress. Were those changes completed?
>
This seems to be the
Fuck youVon meinem/meiner Galaxy gesendet
Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Dominik Datum:
01.04.21 09:52 (GMT+01:00) An: Tony Ambardar ,
dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk Betreff: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Partial
denial of service with dnsmasq on
resource constrained
Hey Tony,
On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 19:43 -0700, Tony Ambardar wrote:
> You're right that text segments are fairly small and shared; memory usage
> was dominated by storage for blocklists read from file. This makes the
> problem more general than just tiny systems, since people tend to size
> their
From: "Tony Ambardar"
On 27/03/2021 17:21, Simon wrote:
>> On 24/03/2021 19:55, Ian wrote:
>>
>> It seems that on resource constrained routers, it’s possible to execute
>> a non-critical denial of service attack against the router simply by
>> opening multiple tcp queries to dnsmasq, which then
On 24/03/2021 19:55, Ian wrote:
>
>
> It seems that on resource constrained routers, it’s possible to execute
> a non-critical denial of service attack against the router simply by
> opening multiple tcp queries to dnsmasq, which then forks for each tcp
> connection up to MAX_PROCS times,
It seems that on resource constrained routers, it's possible to execute a
non-critical denial of service attack against the router simply by opening
multiple tcp queries to dnsmasq, which then forks for each tcp connection up
to MAX_PROCS times, resulting in oom-killer being invoked after the
11 matches
Mail list logo
