Re: (no subject)

Hi,

It is not the existence of the '+' sign which causes Kannel to fail, but 
if I exceed 21 numbers in the
address.

This seems like a prime DOS attack to me.  All I have to do is call 
sendsms with 22 character
'to' address, and Kannel takes a nose dive.

This is a different issue to the URLEncoding one, which is my 
misunderstanding of Http Header
standard.

Regards
Jason

Konstantin Vayner <[email protected]> wrote on 14/04/2003 06:27:46 
PM:

> Why do you assume that HTTP headers should be urlencoded? that is wrong
> So why would kannel go for wrong behavior in parsing them? :)
> 
> [email protected] wrote:
> 
> >
> > Ki,
> >
> > Just to experiment, I tried the following header:
> >         X-Kannel-To: 413131315325424234+556666724243247
> >
> > And it causes the server to crash with the following message:
> >         2003-04-14 18:21:44 [6] PANIC: gw/smsc/smpp_pdu.def:207: 
> > smpp_pdu_pack: Assertion `octstr_len(p->destination_addr) < 21' 
failed.
> >
> > I was trying to get it to send to multiple recipients, and URLEncoded 
> > the address, (thus the + sign), but apparently
> > X-Kannel-To does not get UNUrlEncoded?
> >
> > I tried it again with the following header
> >         X-Kannel-To: 413131315325424234 556666724243247
> >
> > And all worked as expected.
> >
> > Kannel 1.3.1 on Solaris
> >
> > Regards
> > Jason 
> 
> 
>