Alberto Leiva
changed
bug 10579
Comment # 3
on bug 10579
from Alberto Leiva
I guess I'm going to end up as that annoying user that doesn't shut up soon
enough, but well...
Wireshark's whining has prevented several bugs from remaining unnoticed from
casual use and unit testing of my artifact. I have code that handles inner
packets, and there is a small chance that it will corrupt them without this
being visible in the outer checksum.
I mean... I've been looking at the code, and it seems all we'd have to do is
remove the second condition from the if at line 2144 of packet-ip.c (and update
the comment nearby).
For a software that goes through the trouble of decrypting and uncompressing
packets, I think the question should be "is there a good reason to not validate
this checksum?" instead of "is there a good reason to do it?".
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.