I added the initializations because I was getting broken tests on Travis on 
"LEAK_DETECTIVE" tests so I just tried everything.

"identification_t* generic_id = 
>                               (!eap_peer_id->equals(eap_peer_id, peer_id)) ? 
> eap_peer_id : 
> peer_id;"

You are right here, it's the same logic as afterwards here ">                   
snprintf(cmd_buf, sizeof(cmd_buf) - 1, "\"%s\" %s \"%s\"", this->path,
>                               (!eap_peer_id->equals(eap_peer_id, peer_id)) ? 
> "eap" : "ike", 
> (char*)id_buf);" will do everything in the suggestions, thanks a lot for your 
> time!

Regards,
Vyronas Tsingaras

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Willi [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:43 PM
To: Vyronas Tsingaras
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [strongSwan-dev] Pull request for external-authorization plugin


> I think it's okay now. Any comments/suggestions? 

Thanks for your update. Some notes, to listener.c

>               identification_t *my_id = NULL;
>               identification_t *peer_id = NULL;
>               identification_t *eap_peer_id = NULL;
>               my_id = ike_sa->get_my_id(ike_sa);
>               peer_id = ike_sa->get_other_id(ike_sa);
>               eap_peer_id = ike_sa->get_other_eap_id(ike_sa);
>               if( peer_id == NULL || eap_peer_id == NULL )

These NULL-initializations do not make much sense; you'll set these variables 
just afterwards. These identities should be guaranteed to be set, so there is 
no need for that NULL check.

>               if ( (peer_id && my_id && peer_id->equals(peer_id, my_id)) || 
>                       (eap_peer_id && my_id && 
> eap_peer_id->equals(eap_peer_id, my_id)) )

What's the intention for that check? Why should the remote identity be equal to 
the local identity? And why succeed in that case?


>                       FILE* fp = NULL;

Same as above.

>                       identification_t* generic_id = 
>                               (!eap_peer_id->equals(eap_peer_id, peer_id)) ? 
> eap_peer_id : 
> peer_id;

Is that needed? As mentioned in my other mail, get_other_eap_id() has a 
fallback to get_other_id() if it no EAP/XAuth identity has been used.
Just use get_other_eap_id().

>                       memset(id_buf, 0, sizeof(id_buf));
>                       memset(cmd_buf, 0, sizeof(cmd_buf));
>                       memset(cmd_buf, 0, sizeof(prog_out));
>                       DBG2(DBG_CFG, "peer identity received: '%Y'", 
> generic_id);
>                       snprintf(id_buf, sizeof(id_buf) - 1, "%Y", generic_id);

No need to memset() if you snprintf() to it. -1 is not required either; we 
assume snprintf() is guaranteed to null-terminate strings. A single buffer for 
the command probably works as well.

>                       snprintf(cmd_buf, sizeof(cmd_buf) - 1, "\"%s\" %s 
> \"%s\"", this->path,
>                               (!eap_peer_id->equals(eap_peer_id, peer_id)) ? 
> "eap" : "ike", 
> (char*)id_buf);

Is there a reason for replacing the env var with an argument? In my earlier 
comment I though about something like:

snprintf(cmd, sizeof(cmd), "IKE_REMOTE_EAP_ID='%Y' %s", id, this->path);

This is easier to extend, and much easier to parse/interpret in a shell script.

> setvbuf(fp, NULL, _IONBF, 0);

Is that needed? There is some code you can reuse from updown to convert output 
lines to strongSwan debug statements, btw.

>From _plugin.c:

>               /* check if path is empty string or NULL */
>               if(this->path == NULL || !strcmp(this->path, ""))
>               {

You may additionally return FALSE here, so the plugin loader knows that this 
feature has not been loaded. And we have the convenient streq() function to 
avoid negating strcmp().


Would you mind to squash your changes to a clean commit? When doing so, you 
might consider renaming the source files (and the used C
identifiers) to ext_auth_*, so it matches the plugin name. But let me know if 
I'm asking for too much, I can take care of that as well ;-).

Thanks!
Martin


_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to