惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

D
DataBreaches.Net
Y
Y Combinator Blog
I
InfoQ
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
博客园 - Franky
IT之家
IT之家
H
Help Net Security
月光博客
月光博客
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
B
Blog
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
GbyAI
GbyAI
P
Proofpoint News Feed
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
G
Google Developers Blog
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
U
Unit 42
Vercel News
Vercel News
博客园 - 叶小钗
Microsoft Security Blog
Microsoft Security Blog
腾讯CDC
Jina AI
Jina AI
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss

dnsmasq-discuss

[Dnsmasq-discuss] Announce: dnsmasq-2.92rc2 Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Fix arguments order for chaos subdomain check Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] patch: block-file/allow-file - for review/feedback Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] patch: block-file/allow-file - for review/feedback Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] patch: block-file/allow-file - for review/feedback Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] patch: block-file/allow-file - for review/feedback [Dnsmasq-discuss] patch: block-file/allow-file - for review/feedback Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] server= with interface parameter changes behavior over time [Dnsmasq-discuss] NFTsets and hosts-files [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Allow expired RRSIGs when stale caching is enabled [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Fix local host records being overridden by upstream NXDOMAIN [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Fix arguments order for chaos subdomain check Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Malformed RRSIG Can Crash dnsmasq [Dnsmasq-discuss] Malformed NSEC/NSEC3 Can Hang dnsmasq [Dnsmasq-discuss] Malformed RRSIG Can Crash dnsmasq [Dnsmasq-discuss] Security - IMPORTANT Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Issue with circuit-id matching on dhcp requests Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Issue with circuit-id matching on dhcp requests Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Issue with circuit-id matching on dhcp requests [Dnsmasq-discuss] Issue with circuit-id matching on dhcp requests Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] bpf.c: fix memory leak in arp_enumerate() on BSD Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] bpf.c: fix memory leak in arp_enumerate() on BSD Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] dnssec problem here and now Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] dnssec problem here and now [Dnsmasq-discuss] dnssec problem here and now Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] server= with interface parameter changes behavior over time Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] bpf.c: fix memory leak in arp_enumerate() on BSD Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] bpf.c: fix memory leak in arp_enumerate() on BSD Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Preserve existing log file permissions when adding group-write bit. [Dnsmasq-discuss] server= with interface parameter changes behavior over time
Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Git: Is first dhcp.c address_availa...
Simon Kelley · 2025-11-29 · via dnsmasq-discuss

On 9/24/25 12:07, Matthias Andree wrote:
Simon,

looking at dhcp.c as of this commit, and I see it's unchanged from v2.91:

commit ee09f0655c0a4347a72d2bf9b7231ff158a13f53 (HEAD-> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD)
Author: Simon Kelley <[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Sep 1 22:35:02 2025 +0100

   Optimise tftp.


I wonder if the if() clause (next to last line below) is correct, or is in the right place.
That's currently line #699.

The concern is that everything in the

     if(taddr.s_addr==context->router.s_addr)

expression is independent from tmp in the enlosing for(;;) loop, and I cannot fathom how this would make sense.

I suppose a reasonable compiler can decide the first for(tmp=context; tmp; tmp=tmp->current) does not cause observable effects (unless undefined behavior) and just discard the for loop.

Either we want to look at just the context->router.s_addr, then we don't need the for(),
or the if() clause needs to look at something with "tmp"
to make sense for both lines.


Definitely a bug. The code is trying to disallow offering an IP address which is in use by the DHCP server, and it works fine for the simple case. It may fail if there are multiple subnets on the same broadcast domain.

e.g.

dhcp-range=192.168.1.1,192.168.1.100
dhcp-range=192.168.2.1,192.168.2.100

eth0 on the dnsmasq server has addresses 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.2.1

and a DHCPDISCOVER arrives on eth0

we should not offer 192.168.1.1 or 192.168.2.1, but the code as it stands will only disable one of those, which one is indeterminate.

This is not a major bug, or a security problem.

I've just committed the fix.


Also, I am confused reading the undocumented fields of struct dhcp_context {} without reading more than the declaration - it has one "current" and one "next" pointer and we iterate through "current", which isn't very typical from just reading it, but done in many places inside the code so I presume the pointer fields are only named confusingly, so I cannot assess what impact this inconsistency has.


The ->current fields are temporary working space that links all the dhcp-range configs which are valid for the current DHCP transaction in a linked list. Said linked list is passed into the address_available() function in the "context" argument.


Cheers,

Simon.>

structdhcp_context*address_available(structdhcp_context*context,
structin_addrtaddr,
structdhcp_netid*netids)
{
/* Check is an address is OK for this network, check all
possible ranges. Make sure that the address isn't in use
by the server itself. */
unsignedintstart, end, addr=ntohl(taddr.s_addr);
structdhcp_context*tmp;
for(tmp=context; tmp; tmp=tmp->current)
if(taddr.s_addr==context->router.s_addr) // <- QUESTIONABLE for/if VARIABLE CONCORD
returnNULL;
for(tmp=context; tmp; tmp=tmp->current)
{
start=ntohl(tmp->start.s_addr);
end=ntohl(tmp->end.s_addr);
if(!(tmp->flags&(CONTEXT_STATIC|CONTEXT_PROXY)) &&
addr>=start&&
addr<=end&&
match_netid(tmp->filter, netids, 1))
returntmp;
}
returnNULL;
}




_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss