Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Hardening/1751 syntax for uri param q and exists #1756

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 3, 2016

Conversation

kzangeli
Copy link
Member

@kzangeli kzangeli commented Feb 3, 2016

Changed +attr/-attr for attr/!attr in q-string
Added lots of sanity checks for q and q-parts.

Fixes issues #1751 and #1754
Apart from these two issues, q is inspected not to:

  • be empty
  • contain only a ';'
  • contain two consecutive ';'s

These two last checks had to be made before the strtok-loop as strtok doesn't return empty tokens, it just eats them ...

@kzangeli kzangeli added this to the 0.28.0 milestone Feb 3, 2016
@@ -30,27 +30,35 @@ brokerStart CB
--SHELL--
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(Discussed at skype) Add some .test to queck attribute existence and not-existence in query operation.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Functest added in 0b1d496

@fgalan
Copy link
Member

fgalan commented Feb 3, 2016

LGTM (passing the ball to @crbrox for final LGTM + merge + delete branch)

@crbrox
Copy link
Member

crbrox commented Feb 3, 2016

LGTM

crbrox pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2016
…uri_param_q_and_exists

Hardening/1751 syntax for uri param q and exists
@crbrox crbrox merged commit 1dbda77 into develop Feb 3, 2016
@crbrox crbrox deleted the hardening/1751_syntax_for_uri_param_q_and_exists branch February 3, 2016 12:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants