I am not a C developer so I have to guess here.
For me it looks like the `static` address of `buff` is returned by `ip_addr2a`.
```c
char *ip_addr2a(struct ip_addr *ip)
{
static char buff[IP_ADDR_MAX_STR_SIZE];
// ...
return buff;
}
```
--
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/blob/1535031a6c992c23270050793b23d290a631b684/src/core/ip_addr.c#L267C1-L276C2
If that's the case, I think every user of that function should copy the value
from that address instead of remembering the address. Otherwise it is always
the same address for every call of `ip_addr2a` and subsequent calls overwrite
the value of the previous call.
Unfortunately, the sipcapture module uses the returned value directly:
```c
si->address_str.s = ip_addr2a(&si->address);
```
--
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/blob/1535031a6c992c23270050793b23d290a631b684/src/modules/sipcapture/hep.c#L487C2-L487C46
I tested with the following code and I think it confirms my theory because
`foo` changes to "bar".
```c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
char *a(char* in);
int main() {
char *foo = a("foo");
printf("foo %08x -> %08x = %s\n", &foo, foo, foo);
char *bar = a("bar");
printf("foo %08x -> %08x = %s\n", &foo, foo, foo);
printf("bar %08x -> %08x = %s\n", &bar, bar, bar);
}
char *a(char* in) {
static char out[10];
strcpy(out, in);
return out;
}
```
Output:
```plain
foo 0c3399d8 -> b37ba018 = foo
foo 0c3399d8 -> b37ba018 = bar
bar 0c3399e0 -> b37ba018 = bar
```
However, I can't explain why this should be any different in previous kamailio
versions.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/3835#issuecomment-2104328063
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <kamailio/kamailio/issues/3835/2104328...@github.com>_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe send an email to sr-dev-le...@lists.kamailio.org
