On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 6:57 PM, ropers wrote:
> On 19 September 2011 09:51, Mattieu Baptiste wrote:
>> The apache foundation has adjusted the security advisory and Apache 1.3
>> isn't vulnerable.
>>
>> https://httpd.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-3192.txt
>
> Yes, fair enough, BUT that same advis
On 19 September 2011 09:51, Mattieu Baptiste wrote:
> The apache foundation has adjusted the security advisory and Apache 1.3
isn't vulnerable.
>
> https://httpd.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-3192.txt
Yes, fair enough, BUT that same advisory says *in its Apache 1.3 section*:
> However as explaine
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Rod Whitworth wrote:
> What a pity that people don't do any searching b4 asking
>
> STFA for this list and (IIRC) find links to the PoC tool amongst other
> info.
Yes, and this has nothing to do with OpenBSD (this time). The apache
foundation has adjusted the
On 9/18/2011 10:37 PM, Rod Whitworth wrote:
> What a pity that people don't do any searching b4 asking
>
> STFA for this list and (IIRC) find links to the PoC tool amongst other
> info.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 04:24:19 -0600, Shane Harbour wrote:
>
>> On 9/18/2011 9:42 PM, L. V. Lammer
What a pity that people don't do any searching b4 asking
STFA for this list and (IIRC) find links to the PoC tool amongst other
info.
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 04:24:19 -0600, Shane Harbour wrote:
>On 9/18/2011 9:42 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>>> Re
On 9/18/2011 9:42 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> Recently there was a security issue with Apache. It was based on a
>> perl script, search google. Maybe you are experiencing traffic and the
>> realted problems because of that.
>>
> Is there any way to fin
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> Recently there was a security issue with Apache. It was based on a
> perl script, search google. Maybe you are experiencing traffic and the
> realted problems because of that.
>
Is there any way to find out if the version in 4.3 was susceptable to the
at
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Denis Fondras wrote:
> Could this be linked to some "Apache Killer" ?
>
That would make sense, is/was there any way to identify vectors of the
Apache attacks?
Lee
>> > *Something* seems to be breaking, causing Apache to 'think' it's out of
>> > resources.
>>
>> Eg. for amd64 limit of ~4000 processes was resolved only before couple
>> of months/weeks (not sure about correct time). A LOT of improvements
>> from 4.3 times regarding performance and speed of syst
On 2011-09-18 15.54, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> TFTR, but you missed the original premise - the system has been running
> for many years with MORE children authorized, and no resource limits have
> *changed*, so I don't see how it can be a resource issue.
>
> Something is borking Apache and causing it
Le 18/09/2011 15:54, L. V. Lammert a icrit :
>
> Something is borking Apache and causing it to use UP all resources in an
> 'unauthorized' manner, or *think* they have all bee used.
>
Could this be linked to some "Apache Killer" ?
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
> > *Something* seems to be breaking, causing Apache to 'think' it's out of
> > resources.
>
> Eg. for amd64 limit of ~4000 processes was resolved only before couple
> of months/weeks (not sure about correct time). A LOT of improvements
> from 4.3 times reg
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:40 AM, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
>> > [error] (35)Resource temporarily unavailable: fork: Unable to fork new
process
>>
>> Isn't running 4.3 kinda cranky?
>>
> Only in the past six months - pretty much bulletproof for ma
[...]
> Unfortunatley, that isn't the issue. It has run fine with max_clients set
> at 150; when this started happening, I ran it down to 64.
[...]
"Thanks" for pointing this out. Do you have any other minor detail,
before I decide I definitely can't help?
> It isn't a resource problem, however,
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> > [error] (35)Resource temporarily unavailable: fork: Unable to fork new
> > process
>
> Isn't running 4.3 kinda cranky?
>
Only in the past six months - pretty much bulletproof for many years.
> $SEARCH_ENGINE "$your_error_message"
>
> gives
Le samedi 17 septembre 2011 C 04:15:18, L. V. Lammert a C)crit :
> We have an older server (4.3) that is getting cranky - two or three times
> a week Apache just 'stops', and the only issue I can find is in the common
> error log (i.e. not one of the VHs), which shows unable to fork:
>
> [error]
We have an older server (4.3) that is getting cranky - two or three times
a week Apache just 'stops', and the only issue I can find is in the common
error log (i.e. not one of the VHs), which shows unable to fork:
[error] (35)Resource temporarily unavailable: fork: Unable to fork new process
It *
17 matches
Mail list logo
