Skip to content

Conversation

@DeepDiver1975
Copy link
Member

@DeepDiver1975 DeepDiver1975 commented Oct 13, 2016

Description

In case an invalid value for one of the length headers is sent we ignore them when checking the quota

Motivation

By submitting a non numeric value as length header the quote checks could be bypassed.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@DeepDiver1975 DeepDiver1975 added this to the 9.2 milestone Oct 13, 2016
@mention-bot
Copy link

@DeepDiver1975, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @PVince81, @MorrisJobke and @nickvergessen to be potential reviewers.

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

Not sure why (you deleted the "Motivation" section 😉), but ok as a safeguard 👍

@DeepDiver1975
Copy link
Member Author

Not sure why (you deleted the "Motivation" section 😉)

added again

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks, makes sense! merging

@PVince81 PVince81 merged commit a8e96d7 into master Oct 18, 2016
@PVince81 PVince81 deleted the computer-quota-properly-for-non-chunking branch October 18, 2016 14:30
@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

@DeepDiver1975 do we want a backport for this ?

@DeepDiver1975
Copy link
Member Author

I guess so ... @Peter-Prochaska critical enough to backport this to earlier versions? THX

@peterprochaska
Copy link
Contributor

@DeepDiver1975 @PVince81 its a good idea to backport this. It is not the big change...

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

I will take care...

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

stable9.1: #26416
stable9: #26417

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

stable8.2: #26418
stable8.1: #26419
stable8: #26421

Please review the backports

@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Aug 4, 2019

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 4, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants