[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-wget] wget doesn't handle 5-digit port numbers in EPSV reponses
From: |
Tim Rühsen |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-wget] wget doesn't handle 5-digit port numbers in EPSV reponses |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Jan 2015 19:06:05 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/4.14.2 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; ) |
Am Sonntag, 4. Januar 2015, 18:57:23 schrieb Tim Rühsen:
> Am Sonntag, 4. Januar 2015, 16:19:01 schrieb Adam Sampson:
> > Dear wget authors,
> >
> > When using wget --passive-ftp against IPv6 FTP servers, I occasionally
> >
> > get the following error:
> > ==> EPSV ....
> > Cannot parse PASV response.
> >
> > I finally found an FTP server that consistently had this problem today
> >
> > (stunnel.mirt.net), and strace showed that the response in question was:
> > 229 Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||49854|).
> >
> > This is a perfectly valid response. wget is getting confused because of
> > an off-by-one error in the code that parses the port number in ftp_epsv.
> > When the port number is 5 digits long, i will be 5 at the end of the
> > loop, so the test for an invalid port number length should check for it
> > being *greater than* 5.
> >
> > Here's the trivial fix:
> >
> > * ftp-basic.c (ftp_epsv): Accept 5-digit port numbers in EPSV responses.
> >
> > diff -x config.log -x config.status -ru tmp/wget-1.16.1/src/ftp-basic.c
> > work/wget-1.16.1/src/ftp-basic.c ---
> > tmp/wget-1.16.1/src/ftp-basic.c 2014-12-02 07:49:37.000000000 +0000 +++
> > work/wget-1.16.1/src/ftp-basic.c 2015-01-04 16:06:02.281000000 +0000
@@
> > -788,7 +788,7 @@
> >
> > for (tport = 0, i = 0; i < 5 && c_isdigit (*s); i++, s++)
> >
> > tport = (*s - '0') + 10 * tport;
> >
> > - if (i >= 5)
> > + if (i > 5)
> >
> > {
> >
> > xfree (respline);
> > return FTPINVPASV;
> >
> > Thanks very much (and happy new year!),
>
> Happy New Year, Adam.
>
> The loop condition is i < 5, so when i becomes 5 the loop stops.
> So how can i be > 5 here ?
Hehe, I was a bit too fast ;-)
i == 5 *is* a valid value after the loop, so you are right.
But since i never becomes > 5, the checks does not make sense and we should
remove that check. Or change it to what is was meant to be (e.g. i==5 &&
c_isdigit(*s)), I guess.
Tim
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.