ANNOUNCEMENT: Live Wireshark University & Allegro Packets online APAC Wireshark Training Session
April 17th, 2024 | 14:30-16:00 SGT (UTC+8) | Online

Wireshark-dev: [Wireshark-dev] Backport r49648?

From: Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 01:30:40 +0100
Today I saw an expert info about an invalied hf_index or somethin like that
on a customer's windows 1.10.5 wireshark in packet-t124.c. Which I can't reproduce
on my machine (suse13.1, svn head).

The only "interesting" change seems to be:

jmayer@egg:~/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/asn1/t124> svn log  -c49648 packet-t124-template.c
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r49648 | morriss | 2013-05-31 04:27:40 +0200 (Fr, 31 Mai 2013) | 6 lines

Don't intentionally use -1 as an hfindex: while only naughty before, with the
changes from r49644 you'll get complaints about the hf being unregistered...

Note that this code also intentionally passes -1 as an ett_index.  It doesn't
currently complain so I'm leaving it alone for now...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
jmayer@egg:~/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/asn1/t124> svn diff -c49648 packet-t124-template.c
Index: packet-t124-template.c
===================================================================
--- packet-t124-template.c      (revision 49647)
+++ packet-t124-template.c      (revision 49648)
@@ -163,9 +163,11 @@
    * to have a version of dissect_per_sequence() that checks all
    * references to the tvbuff before making them and returning "no"
    * if they would fail.
+   *
+   * We (ab)use hf_t124_connectGCCPDU here just to give a valid entry...
    */
   TRY {
-    (void) dissect_per_sequence(tvb, 0, &asn1_ctx, NULL, -1, -1, t124Heur_sequence);
+    (void) dissect_per_sequence(tvb, 0, &asn1_ctx, NULL, hf_t124_connectGCCPDU, -1, t124Heur_sequence);
   } CATCH_BOUNDS_ERRORS {
     failed = TRUE;
   } ENDTRY;

So maybe it should be backported to 1.10?

Ciao
   Jörg
-- 
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.