unicorn Ruby/Rack server user+dev discussion/patches/pulls/bugs/help
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: Dirkjan Bussink <dbussink@github.com>
Cc: John Crepezzi <seejohnrun@github.com>,
	Kevin Sawicki <kevinsawicki@github.com>,
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

  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     ` Potential Unicorn vulnerability 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:

  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 \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox


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).