- 15 Jan, 2021 21 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
- 14 Jan, 2021 2 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
- 13 Jan, 2021 10 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
* master: go/neo/neonet: Fix thinko in recvPkt
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Testing NEO/go client wrt NEO/py server revealed a bug in NEO/py SSL handling: proper non-ragged EOF from a peer is ignored, and so leads to hang in infinite loop inside _SSL.receive with read_buf memory growing indefinitely. Details are below: NEO/py wraps raw sockets with ssl.wrap_socket(suppress_ragged_eofs=False) which instructs SSL layer to convert unexpected EOF when receiving a TLS record into SSLEOFError exception. However when remote peer properly closes its side of the connection, socket.read() still returns b'' to report non-ragged regular EOF: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/v2.7.18/Lib/ssl.py#L630-L650 The code was handling SSLEOFError but not b'' return from socket recv. Thus after NEO/go client was disconnecting and properly closing its side of the connection, the code started to loop indefinitely in _SSL.receive under `while 1` with b'' returned by self.socket.recv() appended to read_buf again and again. -> Fix it by detecting non-ragged EOF as well and, similarly to how SSLEOFError is handled, converting them into self._error('recv', None).
-
- 12 Jan, 2021 7 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Dial will use handshakeClient with options and retries.
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
We were returning packet with tail read for next packet data. Previously decoding was forgiving, but upcoming rework for msgpack support will add check to catch packets with overlong payload, e.g. === RUN TestEmptyDB/py/!ssl I: runneo.py: /tmp/neo214694750/1 !ssl: started master(s): 127.0.0.1:30621 127.0.0.1:42266 > 127.0.0.1:30621: .1 RequestIdentification &{CLIENT ?(0)0 1 ø [] []} 127.0.0.1:42266 < 127.0.0.1:30621: (N: decode header: len(payload) != msgLen) 00 00 00 01 80 01 00 00 00 09 00 f0 00 00 01 e0 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 58 41 d7 ff 69 82 0a 91 25 00 00 00 03 02 00 00 00 00 e0 00 00 01 02 41 d7 ff 69 82 0a 78 ff 01 00 00 00 09 31 32 37 2e 30 2e 30 2e 31 96 f7 00 00 00 01 02 41 d7 ff 69 81 c6 65 f5 00 00 00 00 09 31 32 37 2e 30 2e 30 2e 31 77 9d f0 00 00 01 02 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 02 00 0a 00 00 00 19 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 01 -> Fix is: pkt.data should be data[:pktLen], not data[:n] since n is how much we have read at all.
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
We were retruning packet with tail read for next packet data. Previously decoding was forgiving, but recent rework along msgpack support added check that is now failing, e.g. === RUN TestEmptyDB/py/!ssl I: runneo.py: /tmp/neo214694750/1 !ssl: started master(s): 127.0.0.1:30621 127.0.0.1:42266 > 127.0.0.1:30621: .1 RequestIdentification &{CLIENT ?(0)0 1 ø [] []} 127.0.0.1:42266 < 127.0.0.1:30621: (N: decode header: len(payload) != msgLen) 00 00 00 01 80 01 00 00 00 09 00 f0 00 00 01 e0 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 58 41 d7 ff 69 82 0a 91 25 00 00 00 03 02 00 00 00 00 e0 00 00 01 02 41 d7 ff 69 82 0a 78 ff 01 00 00 00 09 31 32 37 2e 30 2e 30 2e 31 96 f7 00 00 00 01 02 41 d7 ff 69 81 c6 65 f5 00 00 00 00 09 31 32 37 2e 30 2e 30 2e 31 77 9d f0 00 00 01 02 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 02 00 0a 00 00 00 19 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 01 -> Fix is: pkt.data should be data[:pktLen], not data[:n] since n is how much we have read at all.
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-