Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: PCAP-NG Block Formats


From: Paul Offord <Paul.Offord () advance7 com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 21:49:48 +0000

I see the same problem in Wireshark 2.0.4.  I've created Bug 12508 and attached a three packet file captured with 
Wireshark 2.0.4 that shows the problem.

-----Original Message-----
From: wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org] On Behalf Of Guy Harris
Sent: 10 June 2016 19:17
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] PCAP-NG Block Formats

On Jun 10, 2016, at 8:43 AM, Paul Offord <Paul.Offord () advance7 com> wrote:

OK – let’s hope it’s the doc.  The thing is, if there could be an optional Options block at the end of the EPB we 
will have to have the 4 byte endofopt otherwise a reader could interpret the trailing Total Block Length as an option 
block.  I suppose the standard could require that the reader keep track of the block size and then figure out if 
Options are included but that is pretty messy.

Note that the reader has to keep track of the block size *anyway*, so it doesn't just run past the end of the block if 
the block doesn't happen to include an endofopt (readers must not assume all writers have followed the spec).

So the end-of-option option doesn't make correct option-parsing code any simpler (it makes *unsafe* option-parsing code 
simpler, but there shouldn't *be* any unsafe option-parsing code), and should probably not have been in the spec.  
Perhaps a future version of the spec should allow it to be omitted, and specify that either 1) not having enough space 
left in the block for a full option (i.e., fewer than 4 bytes left in the packet) or 2) seeing an endofopt terminates 
the processing of options (in case a writer puts out an endofopt and some amount of extra junk after it).
 
I’ll raise as a Wireshark bug and let’s see who screams.

Give an indication of which version of Wireshark wrote the file with only a two-byte endofopt, and of the procedure 
used to produce it, and attach a capture; I just looked at the 2.0.x code that writes EPBs and it appears to write 4 
bytes of zeroes.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

______________________________________________________________________

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named 
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if 
you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.

Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Advance Seven 
Ltd. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, 
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept 
liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.

Advance Seven Ltd. Registered in England & Wales numbered 2373877 at Endeavour House, Coopers End Lane, Stansted, Essex 
CM24 1SJ

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

Current thread: