Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: packet-rpc.c does not call an rpc sub-dissector when there are no parameters or there is no response
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:13:47 -0800
On Jan 12, 2017, at 3:00 PM, Richard Sharpe <realrichardsharpe () gmail com> wrote:
In packet-rpc.c we see this: /* * Don't call any subdissector if we have no more date to dissect. */ if (tvb_reported_length_remaining(tvb, offset) == 0) { return TRUE; } However, this is wrong, IMO. One of the things that our dissector functions does is insert items like "PROCNAME Reply" etc against the procedure etc, but I would also like to add text like "void" for void parameters etc. Indeed, dissection of the NULL procedure doesn't show much useful ... Does anyone see a problem with changing it to call the sub-dissector even when there is no more data to dissect?
If it reintroduces the "malformed packet" problem mentioned in bug 1392: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1392 then it'd be a problem, as that check was added in commit 1984f23e28a19333fa4b3ae7e8e1aba7971fe2ab Author: Sake Blok <sake () euronet nl> Date: Tue Apr 15 22:53:34 2008 +0000 Fix for the "Malformed packet: RPC" that is encountered in bug 1392: Don't call a RPC subdissector if there is no more data in the packet. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- packet-rpc.c does not call an rpc sub-dissector when there are no parameters or there is no response Richard Sharpe (Jan 12)
- Re: packet-rpc.c does not call an rpc sub-dissector when there are no parameters or there is no response Guy Harris (Jan 12)