Thank you for your reply. The same problem mentioned by Renmingshuai in this email refers to the fact that in the DHCPv6 packet processing flow, the function dhcp6_no_relay adds the stack variable state->tag to daemon->dhcp_comf->netid->list.
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2024q3/017676.html This is the same as the behavior of the function dhcp_reply in the DHCPv4 packet processing flow, which adds stack variable netid to daemon->dhcp_comf->netid->list. When dnsmasq receives a SIGHUP signal to reload dhcp hostsfile, it will release daemon ->dhcp_comf ->netid in the function clear_dynamic_conf. In this case, daemon ->dhcp_comf ->netid in stack space is freed as a pointer. Therefore, both DHCPv6 and DHCPv4 have bad-free issues. This is also the question I asked in this email, question one: https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2024q3/017730.html At 2024-09-21 20:57:03, "Geert Stappers" <stapp...@stappers.nl> wrote: >On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 07:08:45PM +0800, 胡义臻 wrote: >> I'm renmingshuai's successor, > >Pleased to meet you! > > >> a beginner with dnsmasq, and this e-mail is follow-up to >> >> https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2024q3/017664.html >> > >And that email thread is currently stalled >at https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2024q3/017676.html > >I have bounced that message to you, to enable you to do an in thread >follow-up. (mailserver logentry: 2024-09-21T12:41:31.187603+00:00 >postfix/smtp[2522404]: D0C182000E: to=<huyizhen2...@163.com>, >relay=163mx01.mxmail.netease.com[103.129.252.43]:25, delay=9.3, >delays=0.08/0.02/4.9/4.3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Mail OK queued as >gzga-mx-mtada-g2-6,_____wDnV2r0vu5mj3s4AA--.27372S3 1726922491) ) > > >> Question 1: Why does the dhcp_reply function add the stack variable >> netid to daemon->dhcp_conf->netid->list, which is a global variable? >> ... >> Question 2: Why does the dhcp_reply function use two netid linked lists: >> netid and tagif_netid? Can't we just use one? >> ... >> Question 3: Are there any common test cases for dnsmasq? >> ... > > >One question got a response with matching Subject line. My estimation >is that the other two questions wouldn't get a response. My advice is >to retry in separate emails, each with matching subject line. > > > >Looking forward to further co-operation, regards >Geert Stappers >-- >Silence is hard to parse
_______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
