Hi Wietse,
I have a good news for you. While fixing the bug and auditing all of
its extent, I noticed that the PROXY protocol doesn't use the CRC32
but CRC32c (the Castagnoli variant), which is *not* affected by the
signedness bug :
crc = (crc >> 8) ^ crctable[(crc ^ (*buf++)) & 0xff];
I sus
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 08:40:31AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Willy Tarreau:
> > All this shows that neither CRC32 nor CRC32c are that much used today,
> > or that the usage is limited to situations not sensitive to interop
> > issues. So I want to see it fixed, and we'll put a prominent warning
Willy Tarreau:
> All this shows that neither CRC32 nor CRC32c are that much used today,
> or that the usage is limited to situations not sensitive to interop
> issues. So I want to see it fixed, and we'll put a prominent warning
> in next releases. Do you want to propose a patch or should I do it ?
Hi Wietse,
[CCing haproxy ML and responding inline]
First, thanks a lot for your detailed analysis.
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 09:03:19PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> I found a portability bug in haproxy's CRC32 implementation, while
> adding adding CRC32 support to Postfix's haproxy2 code. The ha
