mailing list archives
Re: Bug in SMB when multiple scripts are connecting to same host
From: Ron <ron () skullsecurity net>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:06:34 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:45:05 -0700 David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 01:44:34PM -0600, Chris Woodbury wrote:
Thanks for the response. Don't worry about the delay - 'better late
than never' is my motto ;). I hadn't thought of the lockout
implications of separate account lists; so, yes, you certainly
wouldn't want to go that route. With that in mind, I put some more
thought into it, and it seems to me that mutexes are the best
I made a patch that adds mutexes to start_session_basic() and
start_session_extended(). My thinking was that the first script to
get there would be responsible for finding the right account (or
exhausting the possibilities), and that, once that was done, the
other scripts could follow along and already have that account
waiting for their get_account() call. I had to put in an "unlock"
before each of the short-circuit returns; so, it's not exactly
pretty, but it gets the job done.
Could you rewrite this with wrapper functions to handle the mutexes,
so as to get rid of the need to unlock at every single return? I'm
afraid the way it's written now will be too hard to maintain.
Ron, what do you think of Chris's solution?
This scares me a little, because I've had some serious problems in the past with mutexes and deadlocks in the SMB code.
But assuming it's implemented well, this is probably the best (only?) way to solve this particular issue.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/