Milter-greylist

Hi,

>>>>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:11:49 +0200
>>>>> manu@... said:

> How about this patch?  It allocates a memory for a sender address and
> a recipient address for autowhite, except and pending lists.  Instead,
> ADDRLEN is enlarged to 127 to handle input string well, and to guard
> against very large address in milter-greylist.c, conf_yacc.y and
> dump_yacc.y.

manu> Instead of 127, what about using the maximum limits here? RFC 821
manu> suggests 64 chars for mailbox and 64 chars for domain name. Plus the '@'
manu> and optionnal quotes around the mailbox, that makes 131. Was it
manu> obsoleted by a newer RFC? I recall a limit of 1024 on the domain name,
manu> but I can't find updated documentation. 

Yes, it is better to use the maximum limits instead of 127.  However,
I'm not sure the value is.
  
> --- pending.c.orig    Wed Aug  4 06:56:07 2004
> +++ pending.c Mon Sep 13 02:56:50 2004
> @@ -134,10 +134,21 @@ pending_get(sa, salen, from, rcpt, date)
>               pending = NULL;
>               goto out;
>       }
> -     strncpy(pending->p_from, from, ADDRLEN);
> -     pending->p_from[ADDRLEN] = '\0';
> -     strncpy(pending->p_rcpt, rcpt, ADDRLEN);
> -     pending->p_rcpt[ADDRLEN] = '\0';
> +     if ((pending->p_from = strdup(from)) == NULL) {
> +             free(pending->p_addr);
> +             free(pending->p_sa);
> +             free(pending);
> +             pending = NULL;
> +             goto out;
> +     }
> +     if ((pending->p_rcpt = strdup(rcpt)) == NULL) {
> +             free(pending->p_from);
> +             free(pending->p_addr);
> +             free(pending->p_sa);
> +             free(pending);
> +             pending = NULL;
> +             goto out;
> +     }

manu> Is there any reason for not sipply panic (ie: display an error and exit)
manu> here?

Because, error handling against malloc() in pending_get() is written
so.

Sincerely,

--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
ume@...  ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/