Wireshark

  • Riverbed Technology
  • WinPcap
the world's foremost network protocol analyzer
  • Wireshark
    • About
    • Download
    • Blog
  • Get Help
    • Ask a Question
    • FAQs
    • Documentation
    • Mailing Lists
    • Online Tools
    • Wiki
    • Bug Tracker
  • Develop
    • Get Involved
    • Developer's Guide
    • Browse the Code
    • Latest Builds

Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defending against NULL dissector handles

Date Index Thread Index Other Months All Mailing Lists
Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next


From: Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:09:47 +0200

On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 06:25:59PM +0100, Neil Piercy wrote:
> Should call_dissector include explicit null handle checks, and if so, 
> should it:-
> 
> a) g_assert - the simple patch attached
> b) fallback to doing a data decode (as disabled protocols do)
> c) try to invoke the wireshark exception handling for the packet

IMO, a) is valid behaviour and while b) might be interesting I haven't
thought through all the consequences in other places that could happen
if we made null handles a feature.

Committed revision 18869.

Thanks!
  Joerg

-- 
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.

  • References:
    • [Wireshark-dev] Defending against NULL dissector handles
      • From: Neil Piercy
  • Prev by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Standards supported by dissectors
  • Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Two typos in README.developer
  • Previous by thread: [Wireshark-dev] Defending against NULL dissector handles
  • Next by thread: [Wireshark-dev] Standards supported by dissectors
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread

Wireshark and the "fin" logo are registered trademarks of the Wireshark Foundation