Re: packet-rpc.c does not call an rpc sub-dissector when there are no parameters or there is no response

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

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