← Back to context

Comment by bawolff

2 months ago

> I wouldn't personally classify these as denial of service. They are just bugs. 500 status code does not mean that server uses more resources to process it than it typically does

Not necessarily. 500 might indicate the process died, which might take more resources to startup, have cold cache, whatever. If you spam that repeatedly it could easily take down the site.

I agree with your point broadly though that the risk of such things are grossly overstated, but i think we should be careful about going in the opposite direction too far.

> Not necessarily. 500 might indicate the process died, which might take more resources to startup, have cold cache, whatever. If you spam that repeatedly it could easily take down the site

That is true, but the status code 500 alone does not reveal that; it is speculation. Status codes are not always used correctly. It is typically just indicator to dig deeper. There might be a security issue, but the code itself is not enough.

Maybe this just the same general problem of false positives. Proving something requires more effort and more time and people tend to optimise things.

  • True, but in the context of the article we are talking about null pointer dereference. That is almost certainly going to cause a segfault and require restarting the process.