[reSIProcate] Parser validation issues

[david Butcher]

In general, the parser is not intended to enforce conformity. It is
required to parse all correct inputs, but is not required to reject
all incorrect inputs.

However, the integer overflow seems like it should be fixed.

david

On 5/8/06, Ofir Roval <Ofir.Roval at kayote.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I came across 2 parsing issues that I would like to share:
>
> 1. When parsing NameAddr fields, the parser will always accept a header
> containing only a STAR sign (*) as valid value. This is of course the
> required behavior for Contact header but for headers like >From and To I
> believe this violates the RFC syntax. Note: other syntax violations will
> usually result with an exception.
>
> 2. When parsing an Interger field like Expires, an integer value greater
> that MAX_INT will result in integer-overflow and the actual parsed int may
> become a negative number.
>
> These issues led me to raise the following question: to what extent is the
> parser responsible for ensuring legal syntax ? what do you think ?
>
>
> Ofir Roval - Kayote Networks
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at list.sipfoundry.org
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
>