NetBSD-Bugs archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
bin/54429: nc(1) loses TCP urgent data
>Number: 54429
>Category: bin
>Synopsis: nc(1) loses TCP urgent data
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Responsible: bin-bug-people
>State: open
>Class: sw-bug
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Fri Aug 02 00:25:00 +0000 2019
>Originator: Valery Ushakov
>Release: NetBSD-8
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
nc(1) does not use SO_OOBINLINE and so it loses any TCP urgent data
sent by the peer.
>How-To-Repeat:
TCP urgent data (MSG_OOB) is virtually unused, so there's no readily
available real-world test case. Consider the following test server
in python (sorry, I'm lazy :)
import socket
s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
s.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET, socket.SO_REUSEADDR, 1);
s.bind(('127.0.0.1', 12345))
s.listen(5)
while True:
c, peer = s.accept()
print "Connection from", peer[0] + ":" + str(peer[1])
c.send('a')
c.send('b', socket.MSG_OOB)
c.send('c\n')
c.close()
Now run nc(1) against it:
$ nc localhost 12345
ac
and you can see that "b", sent as urgent data, is lost.
>Fix:
Add
setsockopt(s, SOL_SOCKET, SO_OOBINLINE, &x, sizeof(x));
to set_common_sockopts() in netcat.c. I'm not sure if we can just do
that for all address families. Since it's at the socket level, it
should be just a no-op for those that don't support MSG_OOB, so it
should be ok to do it indiscriminately I think.
And we probably need to add POLLPRI along with POLLIN to the relevant
poll(2) calls.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index