Re: Newer versions?

From: Robert Harley (harley@pauillac.inria.fr)
Date: Wed Jan 26 2000 - 18:41:05 MET

  • Next message: Philippe Deschamp: "Re: Newer versions?"

    Eric Depagne (Eric.Depagne@obspm.fr) wrote:
    >Looking at the archive, I read that there were new versions than 1.1.0.

    The original version 1.1.0 for Unix was perfect. =:-)

    The Windows-aware ports had a few small increments up to 1.1.3. The
    differences were some user interface issues, small speed improvements...

    Actually the following two minor changes were made in the Unix source:

    1.
    Changed:
      fprintf(f, "Content-length: %d\r\n", strlen(payload));

    to:
      fprintf(f, "Content-length: %lu\r\n", (unsigned long)strlen(payload));

    2.
    Added a check just before the memcpy() at the very end, based on a
    suggestion by Wil Harris of Redhat:

      if ( entry->h_length < 0
           || (size_t)entry->h_length > sizeof(http_addr.sin_addr.s_addr)
         ) {
        puts("Error: address buffer overflow!");
        return -1;
      } /* end if */

    It is conceivable that a malicious intruder who has already taken over
    chunks of your network could make use of a bogus length field here.
    If you're paranoid, insert this check.

    Bye,
      Rob.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 26 2000 - 18:41:15 MET