Re: [PATCH 2/8] hex-escape: be more strict about the format while decoding
authorDavid Bremner <david@tethera.net>
Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:59:36 +0000 (08:59 +2100)
committerW. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:46:03 +0000 (09:46 -0800)
65/2fa81280a0c3ff77077390145b2690c9a60049 [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/65/2fa81280a0c3ff77077390145b2690c9a60049 b/65/2fa81280a0c3ff77077390145b2690c9a60049
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..fc0a2f5
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+Return-Path: <bremner@unb.ca>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64BF431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  5 Apr 2012 04:59:44 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id Fv4pOl1JqDHM for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Thu,  5 Apr 2012 04:59:44 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from tesseract.cs.unb.ca (tesseract.cs.unb.ca [131.202.240.238])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36F7F431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  5 Apr 2012 04:59:44 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from fctnnbsc30w-156034089108.dhcp-dynamic.fibreop.nb.bellaliant.net\r
+       ([156.34.89.108] helo=zancas.localnet)\r
+       by tesseract.cs.unb.ca with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)\r
+       (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bremner@unb.ca>)\r
+       id 1SFlLq-0000kH-PJ; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:59:43 -0300\r
+Received: from bremner by zancas.localnet with local (Exim 4.77)\r
+       (envelope-from <bremner@unb.ca>)\r
+       id 1SFlLk-00010x-M0; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:59:36 -0300\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] hex-escape: be more strict about the format while\r
+       decoding\r
+In-Reply-To: <87hawyxusp.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+References: <cover.1333231401.git.jani@nikula.org>\r
+       <81e543344ffe8e2761afd57a2268e8b362f4aef4.1333231401.git.jani@nikula.org>\r
+       <87fwcitnuk.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <87hawyxusp.fsf@nikula.org>User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+70~g46e73fe\r
+       (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:59:36 -0300\r
+Message-ID: <87aa2qtmmv.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Spam_bar: -\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:59:44 -0000\r
+\r
+Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> writes:\r
+\r
+> On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:33:23 -0300, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:\r
+>> \r
+>> > -     if (len < 3)\r
+>> > +     if (!isxdigit ((unsigned char) p[1]) ||\r
+>> > +         !isxdigit ((unsigned char) p[2]))\r
+>> \r
+>> What happens if there are not two characters after the escape? Is this\r
+>> relying on calling isxdigit on the null terminator?\r
+>\r
+> It is, and technically there's nothing wrong with that. Would you prefer\r
+> explicit checks for '\0' in the if condition, for clarity? Or a comment\r
+> about it?\r
+\r
+I think a comment would do. Or the checks if you prefer.\r