| Message ID | 20241218144025.860687-1-adrian.freihofer@siemens.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | delta_handler: fix sensitive case when parsing header | expand |
Hi Patriarche, is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted to lower case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. Best regards, Stefano Babic On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.patriarche@wattsense.com> > > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to body. > > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.patriarche@wattsense.com> > --- > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ > - string_tolower(answer->data); > > /* Check for multipart */ > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, &boundary_string); > > if (nconv == 3) { > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); > if (cnt == 2) { > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) > free_string_array(pair); > } > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv *priv) > } > s = answer->data; > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ > if (i != 0)
Hi Stephano, This is related to the content of the boundary field. When boundary field contains only numbers (which is the case with a standard apache server) there is no issue. But when boundary field contains string like --CloudFront:85440c5677f30266d3a14df53e855e3e then header record boundary in lower case and when search_boundary_in_body function compare it to the body nothing is found as boundary field in body is with uppercase. The patch aim to keep boundary field from header without converting it to lowercase. Hope this clarify. Best regards, Hervé Patriarche. On Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 15:46:42 UTC+1 Stefano Babic wrote: > Hi Patriarche, > > is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that > comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted to lower > case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. > > Best regards, > Stefano Babic > > On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: > > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to body. > > > > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > --- > > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 > > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c > > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > > > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; > > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; > > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ > > - string_tolower(answer->data); > > > > /* Check for multipart */ > > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, > &boundary_string); > > > > if (nconv == 3) { > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && > > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && > > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); > > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); > > if (cnt == 2) { > > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > free_string_array(pair); > > } > > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && > > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && > > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); > > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; > > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); > > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv > *priv) > > } > > s = answer->data; > > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { > > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); > > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ > > if (i != 0) > >
Hi Stefano/Hervé, We are running into the same issue, to elaborate a bit on it. What happens is, is that the header is lowercased and parsed after that. So if there are alphabetic uppercase characters in the boundary, it turns into the lowercase version. However, where the multipart body is parsed, it does a compare without any conversion, so for the given example, it compares "cloudfront" (lowercase) with "Cloudfront" (uppercase). Can this patch be applied? Thanks! Op donderdag 19 december 2024 om 14:09:45 UTC+1 schreef Hervé Patriarche: > Hi Stephano, > > This is related to the content of the boundary field. When boundary field > contains only numbers (which is the case with a standard apache server) > there is no issue. > But when boundary field contains string like --CloudFront:85440c5677f30266d3a14df53e855e3e > then header record boundary in lower case and when search_boundary_in_body > function compare it to the body nothing is found as boundary field in body > is with uppercase. > The patch aim to keep boundary field from header without converting it to > lowercase. > > Hope this clarify. > > Best regards, > > Hervé Patriarche. > On Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 15:46:42 UTC+1 Stefano Babic wrote: > >> Hi Patriarche, >> >> is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that >> comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted to lower >> case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. >> >> Best regards, >> Stefano Babic >> >> On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: >> > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> >> > >> > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to body. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> >> > --- >> > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- >> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c >> > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 >> > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c >> > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c >> > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) >> > >> > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; >> > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; >> > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ >> > - string_tolower(answer->data); >> > >> > /* Check for multipart */ >> > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, >> &boundary_string); >> > >> > if (nconv == 3) { >> > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && >> > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { >> > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && >> > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { >> > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); >> > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); >> > if (cnt == 2) { >> > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) >> > free_string_array(pair); >> > } >> > >> > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && >> > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { >> > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && >> > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { >> > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); >> > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; >> > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); >> > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv >> *priv) >> > } >> > s = answer->data; >> > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { >> > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { >> > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { >> > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); >> > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ >> > if (i != 0) >> >>
Hi, On 28.01.25 08:46, Alexander Broekhuis wrote: > Hi Stefano/Hervé, > > We are running into the same issue, to elaborate a bit on it. What > happens is, is that the header is lowercased and parsed after that. So > if there are alphabetic uppercase characters in the boundary, it turns > into the lowercase version. However, where the multipart body is parsed, > it does a compare without any conversion, so for the given example, it > compares "cloudfront" (lowercase) with "Cloudfront" (uppercase). > > Can this patch be applied? > Patch is ok, I will apply it soon. Best regards, Stefano Babic > Thanks! > > Op donderdag 19 december 2024 om 14:09:45 UTC+1 schreef Hervé Patriarche: > > Hi Stephano, > > This is related to the content of the boundary field. When boundary > field contains only numbers (which is the case with a standard > apache server) there is no issue. > But when boundary field contains string like -- > CloudFront:85440c5677f30266d3a14df53e855e3e then header record > boundary in lower case and when search_boundary_in_body function > compare it to the body nothing is found as boundary field in body is > with uppercase. > The patch aim to keep boundary field from header without converting > it to lowercase. > > Hope this clarify. > > Best regards, > > Hervé Patriarche. > On Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 15:46:42 UTC+1 Stefano Babic wrote: > > Hi Patriarche, > > is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that > comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted > to lower > case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. > > Best regards, > Stefano Babic > > On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: > > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to > body. > > > > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > --- > > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 > > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c > > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct > hnd_priv *priv) > > > > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; > > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; > > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ > > - string_tolower(answer->data); > > > > /* Check for multipart */ > > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, > &boundary_string); > > > > if (nconv == 3) { > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > type")) && > > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > type")) && > > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", > strlen("boundary"))) { > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); > > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); > > if (cnt == 2) { > > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv > *priv) > > free_string_array(pair); > > } > > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > range")) && > > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > range")) && > > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); > > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; > > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); > > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool > search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > } > > s = answer->data; > > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { > > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); > > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ > > if (i != 0) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "swupdate" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to swupdate+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > <mailto:swupdate+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ > swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba-ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba- > ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
Looking at the patch, I do wonder if the last change (in the search_boundary_in_body function) is needed. Since the boundary is kept as is, it can be argued that the webserver should also use the same formatting for the boundary in the body, making a case insensitive compare unnecessary . But I don't see any technical issues the way it is now. Op dinsdag 28 januari 2025 om 09:15:37 UTC+1 schreef Stefano Babic: > Hi, > > On 28.01.25 08:46, Alexander Broekhuis wrote: > > Hi Stefano/Hervé, > > > > We are running into the same issue, to elaborate a bit on it. What > > happens is, is that the header is lowercased and parsed after that. So > > if there are alphabetic uppercase characters in the boundary, it turns > > into the lowercase version. However, where the multipart body is parsed, > > it does a compare without any conversion, so for the given example, it > > compares "cloudfront" (lowercase) with "Cloudfront" (uppercase). > > > > Can this patch be applied? > > > > Patch is ok, I will apply it soon. > > Best regards, > Stefano Babic > > > Thanks! > > > > Op donderdag 19 december 2024 om 14:09:45 UTC+1 schreef Hervé Patriarche: > > > > Hi Stephano, > > > > This is related to the content of the boundary field. When boundary > > field contains only numbers (which is the case with a standard > > apache server) there is no issue. > > But when boundary field contains string like -- > > CloudFront:85440c5677f30266d3a14df53e855e3e then header record > > boundary in lower case and when search_boundary_in_body function > > compare it to the body nothing is found as boundary field in body is > > with uppercase. > > The patch aim to keep boundary field from header without converting > > it to lowercase. > > > > Hope this clarify. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Hervé Patriarche. > > On Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 15:46:42 UTC+1 Stefano Babic wrote: > > > > Hi Patriarche, > > > > is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that > > comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted > > to lower > > case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. > > > > Best regards, > > Stefano Babic > > > > On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: > > > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > > > > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to > > body. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > --- > > > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 > > > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct > > hnd_priv *priv) > > > > > > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; > > > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; > > > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ > > > - string_tolower(answer->data); > > > > > > /* Check for multipart */ > > > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, > > &boundary_string); > > > > > > if (nconv == 3) { > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > > type")) && > > > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > > type")) && > > > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", > > strlen("boundary"))) { > > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); > > > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); > > > if (cnt == 2) { > > > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv > > *priv) > > > free_string_array(pair); > > > } > > > > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > > range")) && > > > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > > range")) && > > > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); > > > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; > > > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); > > > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool > > search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > > } > > > s = answer->data; > > > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { > > > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); > > > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ > > > if (i != 0) > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "swupdate" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an email to swupdate+u...@googlegroups.com > > <mailto:swupdate+u...@googlegroups.com>. > > To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ > > swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba-ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba- > > ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > >. > >
On 1/28/25 09:18, Alexander Broekhuis wrote: > Looking at the patch, I do wonder if the last change (in > the search_boundary_in_body function) is needed. Since the boundary is > kept as is, it can be argued that the webserver should also use the same > formatting for the boundary in the body, making a case insensitive > compare unnecessary . But I don't see any technical issues the way it is > now. Right, I do not see any issue with the change and it is then the same approach in the whole boundary comparison. Best regards, Stefano > > Op dinsdag 28 januari 2025 om 09:15:37 UTC+1 schreef Stefano Babic: > > Hi, > > On 28.01.25 08:46, Alexander Broekhuis wrote: > > Hi Stefano/Hervé, > > > > We are running into the same issue, to elaborate a bit on it. What > > happens is, is that the header is lowercased and parsed after > that. So > > if there are alphabetic uppercase characters in the boundary, it > turns > > into the lowercase version. However, where the multipart body is > parsed, > > it does a compare without any conversion, so for the given > example, it > > compares "cloudfront" (lowercase) with "Cloudfront" (uppercase). > > > > Can this patch be applied? > > > > Patch is ok, I will apply it soon. > > Best regards, > Stefano Babic > > > Thanks! > > > > Op donderdag 19 december 2024 om 14:09:45 UTC+1 schreef Hervé > Patriarche: > > > > Hi Stephano, > > > > This is related to the content of the boundary field. When boundary > > field contains only numbers (which is the case with a standard > > apache server) there is no issue. > > But when boundary field contains string like -- > > CloudFront:85440c5677f30266d3a14df53e855e3e then header record > > boundary in lower case and when search_boundary_in_body function > > compare it to the body nothing is found as boundary field in body is > > with uppercase. > > The patch aim to keep boundary field from header without converting > > it to lowercase. > > > > Hope this clarify. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Hervé Patriarche. > > On Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 15:46:42 UTC+1 Stefano Babic > wrote: > > > > Hi Patriarche, > > > > is there a better description about the issue you find ? Apart that > > comparison is case insensitive and now data is first converted > > to lower > > case, I do not understand if this solves an issue. > > > > Best regards, > > Stefano Babic > > > > On 18.12.24 15:40, Adrian Freihofer wrote: > > > From: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > > > > Keep header case to allow correct comparaison when compare to > > body. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Patriarche Hervé <herve.pa...@wattsense.com> > > > --- > > > handlers/delta_handler.c | 12 +++++------- > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 > > > --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c > > > @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct > > hnd_priv *priv) > > > > > > range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; > > > answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; > > > - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ > > > - string_tolower(answer->data); > > > > > > /* Check for multipart */ > > > nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, > > &boundary_string); > > > > > > if (nconv == 3) { > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > > type")) && > > > - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content- > > type")) && > > > + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", > > strlen("boundary"))) { > > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); > > > cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); > > > if (cnt == 2) { > > > @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv > > *priv) > > > free_string_array(pair); > > > } > > > > > > - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > > range")) && > > > - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content- > > range")) && > > > + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { > > > pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); > > > priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; > > > size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); > > > @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool > > search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv *priv) > > > } > > > s = answer->data; > > > for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { > > > - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > > + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { > > > DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); > > > /* Reset buffer to start from here */ > > > if (i != 0) > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "swupdate" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send > > an email to swupdate+u...@googlegroups.com > > <mailto:swupdate+u...@googlegroups.com>. > > To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/> > > swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba-ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com > <http://40googlegroups.com> > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba- > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swupdate/b4a44ffa-653d-4cba-> > > ac41-208b79e5d719n%40googlegroups.com? > utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer <http://40googlegroups.com? > utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "swupdate" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to swupdate+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > <mailto:swupdate+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ > swupdate/f5902d32-0724-465a-ac6b-41e25ac1d76bn%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swupdate/f5902d32-0724-465a- > ac6b-41e25ac1d76bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
diff --git a/handlers/delta_handler.c b/handlers/delta_handler.c index c7a57a3c..2039413e 100644 --- a/handlers/delta_handler.c +++ b/handlers/delta_handler.c @@ -642,15 +642,13 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) range_answer_t *answer = priv->answer; answer->data[answer->len] = '\0'; - /* Converto to lower case to make comparison easier */ - string_tolower(answer->data); /* Check for multipart */ nconv = sscanf(answer->data, "%ms %ms %ms", &header, &value, &boundary_string); if (nconv == 3) { - if (!strncmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && - !strncmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-type", strlen("content-type")) && + !strncasecmp(boundary_string, "boundary", strlen("boundary"))) { pair = string_split(boundary_string, '='); cnt = count_string_array((const char **)pair); if (cnt == 2) { @@ -661,8 +659,8 @@ static bool parse_headers(struct hnd_priv *priv) free_string_array(pair); } - if (!strncmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && - !strncmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { + if (!strncasecmp(header, "content-range", strlen("content-range")) && + !strncasecmp(value, "bytes", strlen("bytes"))) { pair = string_split(boundary_string, '-'); priv->range_type = SINGLE_RANGE; size_t start = strtoul(pair[0], NULL, 10); @@ -701,7 +699,7 @@ static bool search_boundary_in_body(struct hnd_priv *priv) } s = answer->data; for (i = 0; i < answer->len; i++, s++) { - if (!strncmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { + if (!strncasecmp(s, priv->boundary, strlen(priv->boundary))) { DEBUG("Boundary found in body"); /* Reset buffer to start from here */ if (i != 0)