On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 10:11 AM wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 15:41:57 -0800 > Aman Gupta <ffm...@tmm1.net> wrote: > > > From: Aman Gupta <a...@tmm1.net> > > > > Signed-off-by: Aman Gupta <a...@tmm1.net> > > --- > > libavformat/http.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/libavformat/http.c b/libavformat/http.c > > index a376f1a488..8f7e56de54 100644 > > --- a/libavformat/http.c > > +++ b/libavformat/http.c > > @@ -311,6 +311,11 @@ int ff_http_do_new_request(URLContext *h, const > char *uri)
> char hostname1[1024], hostname2[1024], proto1[10], proto2[10]; > > int port1, port2; > > > > + if (!h->prot || > > + !(!strcmp(h->prot->name, "http") || > > + !strcmp(h->prot->name, "https"))) > > + return AVERROR(EINVAL); > > + > > av_url_split(proto1, sizeof(proto1), NULL, 0, > > hostname1, sizeof(hostname1), &port1, > > NULL, 0, s->location); > > I rejected this, why was it pushed? Sorry, I understood the rejection to be about the second patch in the set, which is a hack to avoid crypto-wrapped segments. This patch enforces that ff_http_do_new_request() is only invoked on http/https URLContext, which seemed like a sane safe-guard to me. Aman > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
