Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 06:48:38PM +0200, Reyk Floeter wrote: > > > On 06.05.2016, at 18:36, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > >> If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is > >> doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

On Fri, 06 May 2016 18:53:28 +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > It is not an issue, but I thought it was not intended because the > asprintf(3) documentation said: > > "The value of ret in this situation is > implementation-dependent (on OpenBSD, ret will be set to the null >

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

Theo de Raadt wrote: > > If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is > > doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But this > > would also affect many other places in the tree were we rely on our > > asprintf semantics. > > Actually, we have fixed

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

> Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is > > > doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But this > > > would also affect many other places in the tree were we rely on our > > > asprintf semantics. > > > > Actually,

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Todd C. Miller wrote: > On Fri, 06 May 2016 17:56:16 +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > >> Any OK's for this? >> >> Please also see my mail with subject "httpd: fix/style: unbalanced >> va_start and va_end macros" (don't want to spam the

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

> On 06.05.2016, at 18:36, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is >> doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But this >> would also affect many other places in the tree were we rely on

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

On Fri, 06 May 2016 17:56:16 +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > Any OK's for this? > > Please also see my mail with subject "httpd: fix/style: unbalanced > va_start and va_end macros" (don't want to spam the mailinglist :)). I didn't change those before because body and hstsheader are initialized

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

> If OpenBSD's behavior of asprintf is non-standard and everyone else is > doing it differently, we would probably have to apply the patch. But this > would also affect many other places in the tree were we rely on our > asprintf semantics. Actually, we have fixed all usage cases in our tree to

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

> On 06.05.2016, at 17:56, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Hiltjo Posthuma > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The following patch for httpd makes sure the value of the asprintf buffer is >> zeroed

Re: httpd: patch for portability asprintf use

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > Hi, > > The following patch for httpd makes sure the value of the asprintf buffer is > zeroed on error and not relied upon, so at the 'done' label free(body) and > free(hstsheader) is safe. > > from asprintf(3): > >

Re: httpd patch

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 08:36:05PM +, Peter J. Philipp wrote: > Hello, > > I had nothing better to do tonight after work so I read a little in httpd. > I have come up with a patch for i386 and any architecture where off_t != > size_t. > > So on i386 there is this: > > uranus$ ./sizetest >

Re: httpd patch

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 04:35:16AM +, Peter J. Philipp wrote: > Hello again, > > I couldn't sleep because for some reason my head was spinning around this > code. In sleep I reviewed what I remembered of this code and noticed two > things. > > 1. My patch was against 5.8 not -current, so

Re: httpd: patch to close TLS sockets that,fail before TLS handshake

On Tuesday 25 August 2015 19:19:58 Edgar Pettijohn wrote: I was curious if this issue is fixed in -current or if there is going to be a patch available on the errata page? Yes, this is fixed in -current (and will be in 5.8) - see r1.68 of server.c. There may be back ports/commits of various

Re: httpd: patch to close TLS sockets that,fail before TLS handshake

Good enough for me. Thanks On 08/27/15 08:42, Joel Sing wrote: On Tuesday 25 August 2015 19:19:58 Edgar Pettijohn wrote: I was curious if this issue is fixed in -current or if there is going to be a patch available on the errata page? Yes, this is fixed in -current (and will be in 5.8) - see

Re: httpd: patch to close TLS sockets that,fail before TLS handshake

I was curious if this issue is fixed in -current or if there is going to be a patch available on the errata page? Thanks Edgar

Re: httpd: patch to close TLS sockets that fail before TLS handshake

On Wednesday 15 July 2015 23:38:33 Jack Burton wrote: In 5.7-stable -current, httpd, when listening for TLS, does not close the client socket when tls_accept_socket() returns any non-recoverable error. The problem manifests most often when a client connects but does not attempt TLS handshake.

Re: httpd: patch to close TLS sockets that fail before TLS handshake

On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 23:38 +0930, Jack Burton wrote: Sorry, I don't have any hosts running -current at the moment, but I've written a trivial patch against 5.7-stable to treat that particular failure mode in the same way as was already being done for EV_TIMEOUTs. That fixes the issue for us