From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: Dirkjan Bussink <dbussink@github.com>
Cc: John Crepezzi <seejohnrun@github.com>,
Kevin Sawicki <kevinsawicki@github.com>,
unicorn-public@yhbt.net
Subject: Re: Potential Unicorn vulnerability
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 02:26:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210313022615.GA32198@dcvr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66A68DD8-83EF-4C7A-80E8-3F1F7AB31670@github.com>
Dirkjan Bussink <dbussink@github.com> wrote:
> Ah yeah. So do you think that on top of the current patch we’d need
> something like the attached patch (which moves the @request allocation),
> or would only the latter patch be needed then?
Not really, aside from the OobGC change and hijack test removal.
Anyways, I've squashed the test removal, OobGC adjustment, and
your 2nd patch together as commit c917ac526df214611ec33c21de2b070452ec8434
and pushed it out as the "v6-wip" branch.
> In the latter case there’s still a bunch of logic for Rack hijack around
> then which might not be needed at that point, but I’m not entirely sure
> how that would look like.
Yes, though there are also some other HTTP servers that use the
parser. I prefer to minimize changes to the ext code at this
point given the relative lack of C/Ragel-knowledgeable users
compared to Ruby-knowledgeable
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-13 2:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <F6712BF3-A4DD-41EE-8252-B9799B35E618@github.com>
[not found] ` <20210311030250.GA1266@dcvr>
[not found] ` <7F6FD017-7802-4871-88A3-1E03D26D967C@github.com>
2021-03-12 9:41 ` Eric Wong
2021-03-12 11:14 ` Dirkjan Bussink
2021-03-12 12:00 ` Eric Wong
2021-03-12 12:24 ` Dirkjan Bussink
2021-03-13 2:26 ` Eric Wong [this message]
2021-03-13 2:31 ` [PATCH] http_request: drop unnecessary #clear call Eric Wong
2021-03-16 10:15 ` Potential Unicorn vulnerability Dirkjan Bussink
2021-03-16 10:31 ` Eric Wong
2021-03-17 8:03 ` Dirkjan Bussink
2021-03-17 8:47 ` Eric Wong
2021-03-19 13:55 ` Dirkjan Bussink
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://yhbt.net/unicorn/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210313022615.GA32198@dcvr \
--to=normalperson@yhbt.net \
--cc=dbussink@github.com \
--cc=kevinsawicki@github.com \
--cc=seejohnrun@github.com \
--cc=unicorn-public@yhbt.net \
--subject='Re: Potential Unicorn vulnerability' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:
../../unicorn.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).