https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16341
--- Comment #4 from Gerald Combs ---
(In reply to Pascal Quantin from comment #3)
> I generated a pcap from the test case using
> https://github.com/Lekensteyn/wireshark-fuzztools but ASAN/UBSan does not
> report any leak when compiling
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16334
--- Comment #17 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35882 merged by Pascal Quantin:
ICMP/ICMPv6: fix request/response tracking for checksum 0x
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35882
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16334
--- Comment #18 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35883 merged by Pascal Quantin:
ICMP/ICMPv6: fix request/response tracking for checksum 0x
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35883
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16334
--- Comment #19 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35884 merged by Pascal Quantin:
ICMP/ICMPv6: fix request/response tracking for checksum 0x
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35884
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16334
Pascal Quantin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16340
Bug ID: 16340
Summary: Wireshark does not parse prime-field in SSL certifcate
Product: Wireshark
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status:
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16340
Alexis La Goutte changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexis.lagou...@gmail.com,
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16235
--- Comment #12 from Nicolas Darchis ---
is this fix comitted ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.___
Sent via:
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16235
--- Comment #13 from Alexis La Goutte ---
(In reply to Nicolas Darchis from comment #12)
> is this fix comitted ?
No
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16338
--- Comment #6 from Christopher Maynard ---
Created attachment 17577
--> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17577=edit
Image with requeue bit set to true, but Wireshark showing the wrong bit.
--
You are receiving
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16338
--- Comment #7 from Christopher Maynard ---
Created attachment 17578
--> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17578=edit
Image with requeue bit set to false, but Wireshark showing it as true because
the multiple bit is
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16338
--- Comment #8 from Christopher Maynard ---
Created attachment 17579
--> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17579=edit
Capture file with requeue bit set to true, but Wireshark showing the wrong bit.
--
You are
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16338
Christopher Maynard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #17574|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16338
--- Comment #10 from Christopher Maynard ---
(In reply to Jaap Keuter from comment #5)
> (Now with Alexis on CC)
> > Is the fix correct? If so Alexis, can you close the bug? Otherwise can you
> > fix it?
Judging by the capture files and
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16341
Bug ID: 16341
Summary: [oss-fuzz] Indirect-leak in
dissect_lte_rrc_SystemInfoListGERAN_item
Product: Wireshark
Version: Git
Hardware: x86-64
OS:
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16332
--- Comment #7 from ori ---
Thank you!
we will test it out :-)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.___
Sent via:
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16341
Pascal Quantin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pas...@wireshark.org
---
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16342
Bug ID: 16342
Summary: [oss-fuzz] Heap-use-after-free in ROS
Product: Wireshark
Version: Git
Hardware: x86-64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16333
Uli Heilmeier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||u...@heilmeier.eu
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #26 from Christopher Maynard ---
(In reply to Pascal Quantin from comment #25)
> This is actually what is done in the patch set proposed in comment 22 if you
> want to have a look at it.
My apologies. I mistakenly thought all
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16340
Peter Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16339
Peter Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|CONFIRMED
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #24 from Christopher Maynard ---
(In reply to Peter Wu from comment #23)
> For future reference, this is a quick way to configure the dissector with
> the capture from bug 14591 to reproduce the issue raised above:
>
> tshark
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #25 from Pascal Quantin ---
This is actually what is done in the patch set proposed in comment 22 if you
want to have a look at it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16333
--- Comment #4 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35892 had a related patch set uploaded by Uli Heilmeier:
NVME-TCP: Fix ICReq fields:
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35892
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16341
--- Comment #2 from Pascal Quantin ---
Could one remind me how we are supposed to use the reproducer testcase?
I tried running fuzzshark_ip_proto_udp clusterXXX but it does not seem to work
and I do not remember how I did last time (a few
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16295
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Maynard ---
(In reply to Guy Harris from comment #4)
> If somebody wants the outer layer's addresses displayed, are they also going
> to want the outer layer's Info value displayed, or are they going to
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16341
Pascal Quantin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16342
Pascal Quantin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #27 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35879 merged by Peter Wu:
CoAP: change detection logic for CoAP over TCP or TLS
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35879
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16339
--- Comment #2 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35868 merged by Peter Wu:
x509af,ocsp,ber: display serialNumber (INTEGER) as bytes
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35868
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #28 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35894 had a related patch set uploaded by Pascal Quantin:
CoAP: change detection logic for CoAP over TCP or TLS
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35894
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
--- Comment #29 from Gerrit Code Review ---
Change 35894 merged by Pascal Quantin:
CoAP: change detection logic for CoAP over TCP or TLS
https://code.wireshark.org/review/35894
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching
33 matches
Mail list logo
