Home page logo

wireshark logo Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
From: Pavel Karneliuk <Pavel_Karneliuk () epam com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:09:52 +0000

Yes, I am going to gerrit.

From: wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org] On Behalf Of Pascal Quantin
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 6:57 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.

Le 28 mars 2014 16:52, "Pavel Karneliuk" <Pavel_Karneliuk () epam com<mailto:Pavel_Karneliuk () epam com>> a écrit :

Hi Pascal,

thank you for answer. I saw your commits to follow.c and I hoped for your reply.

450:if( newseq > seq[idx] ) {

I think - Yes. It compares sequence numbers.

459: if ( current->data_len > new_pos ) {
I am sure,  that - No. Because it compares length of data from fragment instead of sequence numbers.
Doh that's what happens when you reply without looking carefully at the code ;)

There are some places in check_fragments() and reassemble_tcp() with a "naive" comparison of sequence numbers:
369: if( sequence < seq[src_index] ) {

I think, they should be replaced with macros from packet-tcp.h 51-55.  At least to be uniformly.

As Graham suggested, it would be great if you could submit a patch on gerrit against master branch. Would it be 

Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]