Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI
From: der Mouse <mouse () Rodents Montreal QC CA>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 13:06:55 -0500 (EST)
Now consider the logic required if you allow the use of mapped addresses; [...]
It must be noted that this approach is generally simpler (and to my mind, less error-prone), portable (certainly within *nix, though not win32) and AF forwards-compatible.
It's AF forwards-compatible only if every new AF includes a mapped-addresses version of all previous ones. I don't expect this to be true. Indeed, it isn't now, as far as I can tell, unless you restrict yourself to INET and INET6. Also, note that the application can get whichever set of semantics it prefers by explicitly setting the V6ONLY option on the socket; the tempest in a teapot is strictly about which way the default should be - and since there are OSes that disagree on the default, well-written application code won't depend on the default, instead explicitly setting the option whenever doing things the option affects. /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse () rodents montreal qc ca / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Current thread:
- possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI itojun (Oct 29)
- Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI Colm MacCarthaigh (Oct 29)
- Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI der Mouse (Oct 29)
- Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI Colm MacCarthaigh (Oct 29)
- Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI der Mouse (Oct 29)
- Re: possible issue with IPv4 mapped address and $REMOTE_ADDR in CGI Colm MacCarthaigh (Oct 29)