Re: New teardrop attacks: linux ok??

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:14:08 +0000 (GMT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: William Peck x-6796: "Is 2.1.79 on Sunsite or not?"
Previous message: Bill Hawes: "Re: Teeny, tiny patch to 1.79, & smbfs question"
In reply to: Bill Hawes: "Re: 2.1.79 still has NFS client problems"
Next in thread: Michael Lausch: "Re: 2.1.79 still has NFS client problems"

> BSD was and most BSD boxes are of course subject to the "land" attack
> which Linux never was as he points out below.

Let me follow that up. I really wish English bad bracketing that worked like C ;)

I mean

BSD was subject to the "land" attack and most BSD boxes still
are vulnerable to the "land" attack. Not teadrop

Next message: William Peck x-6796: "Is 2.1.79 on Sunsite or not?"
Previous message: Bill Hawes: "Re: Teeny, tiny patch to 1.79, & smbfs question"
In reply to: Bill Hawes: "Re: 2.1.79 still has NFS client problems"
Next in thread: Michael Lausch: "Re: 2.1.79 still has NFS client problems"