Re: svn commit: r1896361 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c

[Marion & Christophe JAILLET]

Le 07/01/2022 à 14:13, Ruediger Pluem a écrit :


On 12/24/21 2:49 PM, jaillet...@apache.org wrote:

Author: jailletc36
Date: Fri Dec 24 13:49:35 2021
New Revision: 1896361

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1896361=rev
Log:
Close a file handle in case of error in ct_static_scts()

PR 65760 

Modified:
 httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c

Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c?rev=1896361=1896360=1896361=diff
==
--- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c Fri Dec 24 13:49:35 2021
@@ -2967,6 +2967,7 @@ static const char *ct_static_scts(cmd_pa
  
  cert = PEM_read_X509(pemfile, NULL, NULL, NULL);

  if (!cert) {
+fclose(pemfile);

Couldn't we just move that before the if and remove the previously existing 
call?

Regards

Rüdiger


Hi,


if you mean something like:

https://github.com/tititiou36/httpd/commit/1348607c00ba58ce371f2f8ecb08abf610227043

Yes, this is just fine for me.


CJ

Re: svn commit: r1896361 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c

[Ruediger Pluem]

On 12/24/21 2:49 PM, jaillet...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jailletc36
> Date: Fri Dec 24 13:49:35 2021
> New Revision: 1896361
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1896361=rev
> Log:
> Close a file handle in case of error in ct_static_scts()
> 
> PR 65760 
> 
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c
> 
> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c
> URL: 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c?rev=1896361=1896360=1896361=diff
> ==
> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/ssl/mod_ssl_ct.c Fri Dec 24 13:49:35 2021
> @@ -2967,6 +2967,7 @@ static const char *ct_static_scts(cmd_pa
>  
>  cert = PEM_read_X509(pemfile, NULL, NULL, NULL);
>  if (!cert) {
> +fclose(pemfile);

Couldn't we just move that before the if and remove the previously existing 
call?

Regards

Rüdiger