Tom Talpey <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Shouldn't there be some kind of validity check on the rfc1002 length > field before this? For example, the high octet of that field is > required to be zero (by SMB) and the 24-bit length is not necessarily > checked yet. The original code just returned the decoded value but > this sticks it in the msg_iter. If that's safe, then ok but it seems > odd. That should be a separate bugfix, I think. David
