On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:02:42 +0100 Lewis wrote: LAV> looking at usm_process_in_msg() in snmpusm.c [net-snmp-5.5], there does LAV> not seem to be code to specifically reject a request if the associated LAV> user does not have a row status of RS_ACTIVE. The function LAV> usm_check_secLevel() returns -1 in this case but the error code is LAV> ignored. Is this deliberate or just a bug? It certainly seems wrong to LAV> allow a de-activated user to successfully issue commands.
It is a bug, and I saw that Wes just got through checking in a fix. Thanks for prodding us. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
