Le Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:45:36 +0200, Patrick Lamaizière <patfbsd_at_davenulle.org> a écrit : > Le Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:21:36 +0200, > Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd_at_FreeBSD.org> a écrit : > > Hello, > > > > I think that one problem is that the session id (ses->ses_id) is > > > not updated when a free session is reused. The session id is set > > > to zero by bzero() in padlock_freesession(). So we can have > > > several active sessions with the same ses->ses_id == 0 if the > > > sessions are reused. > > > > Great catch! What do you think about using old sessid? I think it's > > ok to do so and a bit safer, because session ID is only 32bit long > > so we may get collision once we start from 0 again. Sorry but i forget this : Since the free sessions are at the head of the TAILQ, i suggest to use a TAILQ_FOREACH_REVERSE instead TAILQ_FOREACH in freession() and process() to skip the free sessions. Regards.Received on Fri Aug 01 2008 - 09:45:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:33 UTC