netdev - Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:08:13 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
CC:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Herbert,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 04:02:22PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
>>Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> wrote:
>>
>>>Looking more closely, I noticed that in traces showing the issue,
>>>the client was sending an additional CRLF after the data in a
>>>separate packet (permitted eventhough not recommended).
>>
>>Where is this permitted? RFC2616 says:
>>
>>	Certain buggy HTTP/1.0 client implementations generate
>>	extra CRLF's after a POST request. To restate what is
>>	explicitly forbidden by the BNF, an HTTP/1.1 client MUST
>>	NOT preface or follow a request with an extra CRLF. 
> 
> 
> And the paragraph just before says :
> 
>    In the interest of robustness, servers SHOULD ignore any empty
>    line(s) received where a Request-Line is expected. In other words, if
>    the server is reading the protocol stream at the beginning of a
>    message and receives a CRLF first, it should ignore the CRLF.

It is the HTTP server code being addressed there, not the underlying TCP stack 
is it not?


rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html