[#38647] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5130][Open] Thread.pass sticks on OpenBSD — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>

16 messages 2011/08/01

[#38653] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5135][Open] Ruby 1.9.3-preview1 tests fails in Fedora Rawhide — Vit Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>

31 messages 2011/08/01

[#38666] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5138][Open] Add nonblocking IO that does not use exceptions for EOF and EWOULDBLOCK — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>

61 messages 2011/08/01
[#38667] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5138][Open] Add nonblocking IO that does not use exceptions for EOF and EWOULDBLOCK — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2011/08/01

On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 07:35:15AM +0900, Yehuda Katz wrote:

[#38669] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5138][Open] Add nonblocking IO that does not use exceptions for EOF and EWOULDBLOCK — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2011/08/01

(08/02/2011 07:46 AM), Aaron Patterson wrote:

[#38671] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5138][Open] Add nonblocking IO that does not use exceptions for EOF and EWOULDBLOCK — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/08/01

Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#38695] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5144][Open] Remove GPL file from repository — Vit Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>

17 messages 2011/08/02

[#38706] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5147][Open] mkmf should not require static library when ruby is built with --enable-shared — Vit Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>

9 messages 2011/08/02

[#38894] Why Ruby has versioned paths? — V咜 Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>

Hello, could somebody please elaborate about reasons why Ruby uses versioned

9 messages 2011/08/10

[#38972] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5193][Open] ruby_thread_data_type linker errors fixed with RUBY_EXTERN — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>

28 messages 2011/08/16

[#38980] :symbol.is_a?(String) — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>

http://viewsourcecode.org/why/redhanded/inspect/SymbolIs_aString.html

8 messages 2011/08/16

[#39025] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5206][Open] ruby -K should warn — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>

14 messages 2011/08/19

[#39062] Releasing r33028 as Ruby 1.9.3 RC1 — Yugui <yugui@...>

Hi,

17 messages 2011/08/23

[#39093] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5227][Open] Float#round fails on corner cases — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>

14 messages 2011/08/24
[#39115] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5227][Assigned] Float#round fails on corner cases — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...> 2011/08/26

[#39126] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5227][Assigned] Float#round fails on corner cases — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...> 2011/08/26

Hi

[#39120] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5233][Open] OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket has problems with encodings other than "ascii" — Niklas Baumstark <niklas.baumstark@...>

9 messages 2011/08/26

[#39142] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5239][Open] bootstraptest/runner.rb: assert_normal_exit logic broken on Debian/GNU kFreeBSD — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...>

11 messages 2011/08/27

[#39162] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5244][Open] Continuation causes Bus Error on Debian sparc — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...>

29 messages 2011/08/28

[ruby-core:38682] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5138][Open] Add nonblocking IO that does not use exceptions for EOF and EWOULDBLOCK

From: Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date: 2011-08-02 00:26:55 UTC
List: ruby-core #38682
Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> (08/02/2011 08:48 AM), Eric Wong wrote:
> > Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> >> (08/02/2011 08:35 AM), Eric Wong wrote:
> >>> Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> >>>> (08/02/2011 08:14 AM), Eric Wong wrote:
> >>>>> Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> So when you  do a read loop,  nothing bothers you, as long  as you use
> >>>>>> readpartial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That use of select + readpartial is unsafe.
> >>>>
> >>>> Unsafe how?  readpatial works even without no data on a buffer.
> >>>
> >>> readpartial will block if there's no data readable, potentially freezing
> >>> the whole process.
> >>
> >> Yes but that's not catastrophic.  The peer side is sending a data anyway.
> >> Checksum incorrect packets are dropped but retransmitted sooner or later.
> >> The process blocks during that retransmission.  That won't last so long.
> > 
> > Malicious clients can take advantage of this to launch a denial-of-service
> > attack
> 
> ... even when you do a blocking IO.  TCP's having problems on malicious
> clients is a known issue of the protocol I think.

Yes, but I think one should be as defensive-as-possible for these
things.

> > Also, networks should never be considered reliable and simple
> > operations can fail or take a long time.
> 
> is that the problem we are talking about here?  Does Yehuda need a DoS-
> proven read loop? or he just want a fast variant of read_nonblock?

I don't know what Yehuda needs, but code proliferates and I would hate
to see reliance on fragile assumptions badly affect something down
the line that went beyond Yehuda's original need.

-- 
Eric Wong

In This Thread