Hi, sorry I should have read better previous posts. I tried latest SVN branch and it works. My modification (which in fact was inspired by nhelper_funcs.c of release 3.0.3) differs in that if the content-length is greater then the effective body length the latter is used. I recognize that this is not a good approach even if it worked for my customer (which by the way is using Bria 2.2, that sometimes sends incorrect content-length).
Thanks, Federico 2010/9/7 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com> > Hello, > > have you tried with latest SVN branch 1.5? > > The issue should have been solved by a commit couple of months ago: > > http://openser.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/openser/branches/1.5/modules/nathelper/nhelpr_funcs.c?r1=5884&r2=5995 > > If does not work with latest SVN, let us know. > > Thanks, > Daniel > > > > On 9/2/10 2:27 PM, federico cabiddu wrote: > > Hi, > I'm using kamailio 1.5.4-notls and I'm experimenting crashes when an UAC > sends an INVITE with a content-length greater then the effective body > length. > The error messages written on the logs is: > > CRITICAL:core:del_lump: offset exceeds message size (1266 > 1161) > aborting... > > and this is the backtrace of the generated core file: > > #0 0x00002ad718ab307b in raise () from /lib/libc.so.6 > (gdb) bt > #0 0x00002ad718ab307b in raise () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #1 0x00002ad718ab484e in abort () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #2 0x0000000000418f53 in del_lump (msg=0x66de00, offset=1266, len=12, > type=HDR_OTHER_T) at data_lump.c:292 > #3 0x00002ad71a8145ba in alter_mediaip (msg=0x66de00, body=<value > optimized out>, oldip=0x7fff81fe6700, oldpf=<value optimized out>, > newip=0x7fff81fe66e0, newpf=2, preserve=0) > at nathelper.c:1857 > #4 0x00002ad71a821a3a in force_rtp_proxy (msg=0x66de00, str1=<value > optimized out>, str2=<value optimized out>, offer=<value optimized out>) at > nathelper.c:2871 > #5 0x00002ad71a8238df in rtpproxy_offer1_f (msg=0x66de00, str1=0x65f370 > "cof", str2=<value optimized out>) at nathelper.c:2391 > #6 0x000000000040cc5a in do_action (a=0x65f400, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:874 > #7 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #8 0x0000000000454155 in eval_expr (e=0x65f4d0, msg=0x66de00, val=0x0) at > route.c:1171 > #9 0x0000000000453bd7 in eval_expr (e=0x65f518, msg=0x66de00, val=0x0) at > route.c:1488 > #10 0x0000000000453b7f in eval_expr (e=0x65f560, msg=0x66de00, val=0x0) at > route.c:1493 > #11 0x000000000040c4c9 in do_action (a=0x65ffe8, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:729 > #12 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #13 0x000000000040dbc9 in do_action (a=0x660528, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:746 > #14 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #15 0x000000000040dbc9 in do_action (a=0x6606c8, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:746 > #16 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #17 0x000000000040dac5 in do_action (a=0x656790, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:120 > #18 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #19 0x000000000040dbc9 in do_action (a=0x656860, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:746 > #20 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #21 0x000000000040dac5 in do_action (a=0x6560b0, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:120 > #22 0x000000000040f19f in run_action_list (a=<value optimized out>, > msg=0x66de00) at action.c:145 > #23 0x000000000040f4f3 in run_top_route (a=0x64b870, msg=0x66de00) at > action.c:120 > #24 0x0000000000444e90 in receive_msg ( > buf=0x619a20 "INVITE sip:xxxxx...@xxxxxxxxxxxx SIP/2.0\r\nVia: > SIP/2.0/UDP > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:xxxx;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-24245342621eb55b-1---d8754z-;rport\r\nMax-Forwards: > 69\r\nContact: <sip:xxxxx...@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx"..., len=1161, > rcv_info=0x7fff81fe86e0) at receive.c:175 > #25 0x0000000000479254 in udp_rcv_loop () at udp_server.c:449 > #26 0x0000000000427237 in main (argc=7, argv=0x7fff81fe88e8) at main.c:774 > > I couldn't get to reproduce this behavior in my test development (it has > newer version of glibc) in which I only get the messages: > > ERROR:core:anchor_lump: offset exceeds message size (1125 > 714)... > ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: anchor_lump failed > > Looking into nathelper code, extract_body function I found that the > body->len value is taken from Content-Length header, so i added the > following piece of code: > > --- nhelpr_funcs.c.orig 2010-09-02 14:04:09.891649254 +0200 > +++ nhelpr_funcs.c 2010-09-02 14:17:40.183747107 +0200 > @@ -196,6 +196,12 @@ > LM_ERR("message body has length zero\n"); > goto error; > } > + > + if (body->len + body->s > msg->buf + msg->len) { > + LM_ERR("content-length exceeds packet-length by %d\n", > + (body->len + body->s) - (msg->buf + > msg->len)); > + body->len=strlen(body->s); > + } > > /* no need for parse_headers(msg, EOH), get_body will > * parse everything */ > > This way if the Content-Length header is greater then the effective body > length body->len is corrected with the real value. > This solved for the moment, but I'm not sure if this is a good approach and > I still don't understand why in the test platform I cannot reproduce the > crash. > > Regards, > > Federico Cabiddu > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing > listsr-us...@lists.sip-router.orghttp://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierlahttp://www.asipto.com > >
_______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
