[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#519586: Huge "Slab Unreclaimable" and continually growing



On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 08:56 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > I appear to be experiencing a serious problem with a 768 MB RAM Xen domU
> > machine running an NFS client - every now and then (for months now), often
> > in the middle of the night, it enters some kind of a broken state where a
> > few semi-random processes (mainly apache2's and vsftpd's which are told to
> > serve files from the NFS mount)
[...]
> I caught it earlier just now, at:
> 
> [950084.590733] active_anon:2805 inactive_anon:11835 isolated_anon:0
> [950084.590735]  active_file:76 inactive_file:516 isolated_file:32
> [950084.590737]  unevictable:783 dirty:1 writeback:0 unstable:0
> [950084.590739]  free:26251 slab_reclaimable:15733 slab_unreclaimable:128868
> [950084.590741]  mapped:938 shmem:75 pagetables:651 bounce:0
> 
> And snuck in a few slabtops (even some -o invocations were getting killed,
> along with my shell and pretty much everything else):
[...]
>  65390  65390 100%    2.06K  13338       15    426816K net_namespace
[...]

Looks like CVE-2011-2189, for which there was a fix/workaround in:

vsftpd (2.3.2-3+squeeze2) stable-security; urgency=high

   * Non-maintainer upload by the Security Team.
   * Disable network isolation due to a problem with cleaning up network
     namespaces fast enough in kernels < 2.6.35 (CVE-2011-2189).
     Thanks Ben Hutchings for the patch!
   * Fix possible DoS via globa expressions in STAT commands by
     limiting the matching loop (CVE-2011-0762; Closes: #622741).

 -- Nico Golde <nion@debian.org>  Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:39:59 +0000

Do you have an old version of vsftpd, or perhaps an upstream version
which doesn't include the workaround?

Anyway, I'm closing the bug report; please don't hijack closed bugs.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Computers are not intelligent.	They only think they are.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: