[PATCH] 2.4.2 nnrpd/perm.c possible problem
Chris Caputo
ccaputo at alt.net
Wed Jul 20 20:24:58 UTC 2005
Hi. I was looking at PERMgetpermissions() in 2.4.2's nnrpd/perm.c today.
I think the "if" statement after "#ifdef DO_PERL" might need to be changed
from
} else if (success_auth->access_script != NULL) {
to
} else if ((success_auth->access_script != NULL) &&
(success_auth->access_type == PERMperl_access)) {
so that it matches the check done a little lower by the
"#ifdef DO_PYTHON", which is:
} else if ((success_auth->access_script != NULL) &&
(success_auth->access_type == PERMpython_access)) {
Otherwise if both DO_PERL and DO_PYTHON are defined, unlikely as that is,
then there will be times where a perl script execution is attempted for a
python script.
Untested (not even actually compiled with DO_PERL) patch below, in case
folks agree this needs to be fixed.
Thanks,
Chris
--- perm.c.original 2004-12-22 04:21:19.000000000 +0000
+++ perm.c 2005-07-20 20:21:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -1544,7 +1562,7 @@ void PERMgetpermissions()
SetDefaultAccess(PERMaccessconf);
return;
#ifdef DO_PERL
- } else if (success_auth->access_script != NULL) {
+ } else if ((success_auth->access_script != NULL) && (success_auth->access_type == PERMperl_access)) {
i = 0;
cpp = xstrdup(success_auth->access_script);
args = 0;
More information about the inn-workers
mailing list