X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6169DB5FC for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26541-04 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 04:31:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D9E1DB5F8 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:36 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151D0A246D8 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:36 -0400 (AST) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28603-05; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 04:31:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-222-82-85.eastlink.ca [24.222.82.85]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB8CA246D6; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:32 -0400 (AST) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5CE9A46AF4; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C19A46A19; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:31 -0400 (AST) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:31:31 -0400 (AST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" X-X-Sender: scrappy@ganymede.hub.org To: Robert Bernier Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Runaway zope on svr2? In-Reply-To: <200510311450.31018.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <20051101003108.D993@ganymede.hub.org> References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E7D6@algol.sollentuna.se> <200510311450.31018.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.337 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.337] X-Spam-Score: 0.337 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/2 X-Sequence-Number: 8717 On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Robert Bernier wrote: > On Monday 31 October 2005 14:10, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> There is a zope process running there at about 90% CPU usage, which >> appears to have been pegged there for quite a whlie - it's used up 7500 >> hours of CPU time since Oct 24th. Somebody who knows about that one >> mshould probably look into that one ASAP :-) >> >> It's used for techdocsl, but it certainly shouldn't look like that... >> > > I think I have this wrong but wasn't there a php exploit recently > reported that affected zope? Can somebody clarify this? Details ... you do know that Zope is Python, not PHP, right? I'd *really* love to see that exploit though :) ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664