From: Dirkjan Bussink <email@example.com>
To: Eric Wong <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: John Crepezzi <email@example.com>,
Kevin Sawicki <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: Re: Potential Unicorn vulnerability
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 12:14:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <382B893C-A07C-4705-950E-6D1CA766D998@github.com> (raw)
> On 12 Mar 2021, at 10:41, Eric Wong <email@example.com> wrote:
> I'm not in favor of new options since they add support costs
> and increase the learning/maintenance curve.
> What I've been thinking about is bumping the major version to 6.0
> Although our internals are technically not supported stable API,
> there may be odd stuff out there similar to OobGC that uses
> instance_variable_get or similar things to reach into internals.
> Added with the fact our internals haven't changed in many years;
> I'm inclined to believe there are other OobGC-like things out
> there that can break.
> Also, with 6.0; users who completely avoid Threads can keep
> using 5.x, while others can use 6.x
That sounds like a good plan then. Once there’s a new version we can
bump that on our side to remove the manual patch then.
> Btw, did you consider replacing the @request HttpRequest object
> entirely instead of the env and buf elements?
> I suppose that's more allocations, still; but could've
> been a smaller change.
Ah, that’s a very good point. I think that would also have been a valid
approach but it does indeed add more allocations. If that approach would
be preferred, I think it can also be changed to that?
I don’t really have a strong preference on which approach to take here,
> Oops, was that the integration tests in t/* ?
Nope, looks like some platform behavior changes (tried on MacOS first).
I was able to get the tests running and working on Debian Buster this
morning before I sent a new version of the patch and they are all passing
there for me locally.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-12 11:14 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 [this message]
2021-03-12 12:00 ` Eric Wong
2021-03-12 12:24 ` Dirkjan Bussink
2021-03-13 2:26 ` Eric Wong
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
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 \
* 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).