Now, I'm somewhat new to FreeBSD, but I've really enjoyed it as an OS
so far, and found it to be quite fast, stable, and well laid out.
Some things I've found difficult to get used to but I'm by and large
quite impressed.
Anyway, I set up 5.3 a while back from a DOS partition using the 5.3
boot
Hello,
I am currently trying to set up two caching nameservers and noticed an
interesting behaviour.
The configuration is the following:
two FreeBSD/amd64 6-CURRENT machines, with single Opteron processors.
Bind was compiled from ports, without threading, with gcc34 (from
ports), with -O2
Hi!
I've got a nifty new server board with an IPMI card.
The console-redirection over LAN is supposed to work for anything that
uses DOS-style video modes or characters, i.e. no graphics mode.
In fact it works for the BIOS/boot*/loader and first kernel
messages up to the point where
Hi all,
We've recently found a problem with dhclient that can DoS a DHCP
server. If you have schg flags set on /etc/resolv.conf to stop dhcp
overwriting your existing nameservers, the problem occurs.
Basically, the client just keeps rejecting the IP details it has
received from the server
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 01:41:12PM +, Ian Watkinson wrote:
We've recently found a problem with dhclient that can DoS a DHCP
server. If you have schg flags set on /etc/resolv.conf to stop dhcp
overwriting your existing nameservers, the problem occurs.
Basically, the client just keeps
In local.freebsd-hackers, you wrote:
We've recently found a problem with dhclient that can DoS a DHCP
server. If you have schg flags set on /etc/resolv.conf to stop dhcp
overwriting your existing nameservers, the problem occurs.
Basically, the client just keeps rejecting the IP details it has
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 04:11:14PM +0100, Volker Stolz wrote:
In local.freebsd-hackers, you wrote:
We've recently found a problem with dhclient that can DoS a DHCP
server. If you have schg flags set on /etc/resolv.conf to stop dhcp
overwriting your existing nameservers, the problem occurs
First sorry me if this messages is out of topic for some email-lists, but
if some one know a solution, please help me.
Hi was victim of a DOS attack, my server was out for about 5 hours,
services like web and email where down.
I am using round robind dns for a load balancing, but this only help
I think there can be a problem if we allow rfork without
either RFCFDG or RFFDG and RFTHREAD.
Basically because we cache the ADVLOCK flag in the proc
we may have a situation where this happens:
p1 rfork(RFMEM); /* gets back p2 */
p2 advlocks some files from the shared table
p2 exits, but since
Well, the manual page (which may be out of date) infers
that the rfork() only operates on the current process if
RFPROC is not set. If we extend that to include RFTHREAD
then the inference is that either RFPROC or RFTHREAD must be
set and if neither is set an error should be
* Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [030109 12:37] wrote:
Well, the manual page (which may be out of date) infers
that the rfork() only operates on the current process if
RFPROC is not set. If we extend that to include RFTHREAD
then the inference is that either RFPROC or
Why do you want to install it on a DOS extended partition?
Just remove that extended patition and install FreeBSD in the unused
portion
of the disk. Install the FreeBSD boot manager so you can boot into
whichever OS you want to.
Mike
;Mike Makonnen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "faisal" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Andrew Hesford" [EMAIL PROTECTED];
"Will Mitayai Keeso Rowe" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "FreeBSD" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: freebsd
Hello
Can freeBSD be installed in a dos extended partition ?
I am having real trouble creating another primary partition ..
on have 1 dos logical partition in my extended ..
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address
I don't know if FreeBSD supports installing into DOS extended partition.
installing an OS in a DOS extended partition is dangrous, it can be
easily rewritten by DOS utils, if you havn't space to create a partition,
I sugguest you use PQMagic like partition utils to shrink existing
partitions
Any comments or suggestions welcome.
Fix doscmd, which does the emulation in userland (which is even better
than running as a KLD).
--
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want
to be opponents,
Any comments or suggestions welcome.
Fix doscmd, which does the emulation in userland (which is even better
than running as a KLD).
What's wrong with doscmd ? I hadn't noticed this one used BSD filesystems
in addition to image files. That was my #1 issue with some of the other
emulators.
Any comments or suggestions welcome.
Fix doscmd, which does the emulation in userland (which is even better
than running as a KLD).
What's wrong with doscmd ? I hadn't noticed this one used BSD filesystems
in addition to image files. That was my #1 issue with some of the other
abandoning it entirely and making plex86 work, if
one was really interested in that sort of thing.
Thanks for the information. I have alot of DOS programming experience, and
although little BSD programming experience, I have read quite a bit and
attended a 4.x KLD authoring conference at ToorCon. Since
I've had this idea kicking around for some time, so
I decided I would throw it out there and see if anyone was interested or had any
ideas.
I'm wondering why we can'twrite basic DOS
emulation as a KLD. DOS programs are x86 code, a majority of it usually
doing basic mundane (userland
The other day I was testing various exploits that I
have accumulated over time against my firewall. I had
always used these to test any new boxes I brought
online. All was fine, until I tried it from the
internet side of the firewall. I have found that
boink.c, the old exploit from 98, when used
I notice that the FreeBSD bootloader (boot0) explicitly prohibits
booting from Extended DOS partitions (type 5). As far as I can
see, an Extended DOS partition looks like a virtual disk - sector
0 contains a partition table explaining how that partition is broken
up into secondary partitions
Denial of Service and kernel panic (out of mbuf) appears when following
program executes (originally reported by Sven Berkenvs
([EMAIL PROTECTED])). Affects FreeBSD 3.x 4.0, OpenBSD 2.5, OpenBSD 2.6,
NetBSD 1.4.1.
#include unistd.h
#include sys/socket.h
#include fcntl.h
#define BUFFERSIZE
]
--- Forwarded message not yet posted to bugtrack ---
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 2 14:43:02 2000
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:49:54 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ussr Labs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Local FreeBSD, Openbsd, NetBSD, DoS Vulnerability
Message-ID
After reading the article,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/09/MN23532.DTL
I am wondering if FreeBSD should take any action to protect our users.
I think it would speak incredibly highly of FreeBSD if Yahoo and other
"customers" were to have some kind of
I could imagine this causing problems with people that are behind a proxy
server or NAT. Since whatever would be collecting the statistics could
easily write off these systems as being offensive. I could safely assume
that this would prevent access of sites to a few of our customers who have
a
political a move to make?
Johnathan Meehan
- Original Message -
From: Ed Gold [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2000 1:43 AM
Subject: Regarding DOS violations
After reading the article,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle
if Yahoo
and other "customers" were to have some kind of protection from such
an attack. My initial thoughts are:
A web server should know its limitations and not attempt to handle
more requests than it can manage. It should invoke a service cutoff
The problem is that for most floo
Yes folks, it's that time again: time for more administrative limits!
I've worked out a resource limit (for FreeBSD in this case, but not
non-portable) which allows prevention of DoS by mbuf starvation. Others
are working on making the networking code more resilient, while this is
a general
Yes folks, it's that time again: time for more administrative limits!
I've worked out a resource limit (for FreeBSD in this case, but not
non-portable) which allows prevention of DoS by mbuf starvation. Others
are working on making the networking code more resilient, while this is
a general
It probably needs work still, and I'd really appreciate someone
helping finish it, but I have a solution.
http://www.FreeBSD.org/~green/sbsize.patch
--
Brian Fundakowski Feldman / Any sufficiently advanced bug is\
gr...@freebsd.org | indistinguishable from a
It probably needs work still, and I'd really appreciate someone
helping finish it, but I have a solution.
http://www.FreeBSD.org/~green/sbsize.patch
--
Brian Fundakowski Feldman / "Any sufficiently advanced bug is\
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | indistinguishable from
32 matches
Mail list logo
