Re: (no subject)

The issue here is that no matter how wrong the submitted pdu is, kannel 
should never crash because of it

Kwok Peng Tuck wrote:

> I think you run into the :
>
> smpp_pdu_pack: Assertion `octstr_len(p->destination_addr) < 21' failed.
>
> because  your string is being interpreted as one long bunch. For a 
> submit_sm pdu, the maximum
> length of the source_addr and destination address is 21.
>
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>