On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Philip Martin >> <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: >>> Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> I don't know what Surf-Shield does. Its description says: "Can detect >>>> exploit sites and other complex online threats". There is some more >>>> explanation on the AVG website, but it's still pretty vague [2]. Maybe >>>> it does some throttling of requests/responses, inspecting things or >>>> so, ... but whatever it does, svn+serf should probably not crash or >>>> hang. >>> >>> You could compare the apache logs with/without Surf-Shield. >>> You could >>> capture the traffic with/without Surf-Shield and compare. > > Ok, I picked the first failing test, authz_tests.py#4, and executed > that with and without Surf-Shield. Please find in attachment two zip > files of those two runs, containing Apache logs and a wire capture, as > well as the crash dump file. > > I don't see a difference in the Apache logs (they are identical, > except that the crashing one stops earlier). The wire capture ... I'm > not sure. The one from the crash is obviously smaller. But when I > "follow TCP stream" they both seem identical (same number of bytes and > all), and when I then filter out the followed stream, nothing remains. > So I'm not sure where the difference is ... > > I'm hoping someone can take it from here. I'm not familiar with this > part of the code. Maybe the best place to start digging is the crash > dump (and/or a more thorough analysis of both wire captures). If I > hear nothing in the next couple of days, I'll put this into the issue > tracker so it isn't forgotten.
Ok, I finally made an issue out of this: http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4175 -- Johan
