[Richard Maudsley <richard.maudsley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Evan, thanks for your reply.

 

I saw the functions register_postdissector and call_all_postdissectors in packet.h. I’m really looking for something that does the opposite (“predissector”?) for heuristic dissectors. Is there some way to achieve this?

 

I don’t consider it to be a bug in the built-in dissector, it’s working just fine! My plugin handles a subset of the protocol that the built-in dissector implements – a missing feature, if you like – hence the need for a plugin.

 

Regards, Richard

 

Richard Maudsley | Junior Systems Developer

Office: +44 (0)207 990 0900 | Fax: +44 (0)203 355 4262

UK Office: First Floor, Vectra House, 36 Paradise Road, Richmond, TW9 1SE

Website: www.powwownow.co.uk

 

 

The information contained in this email and attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the individual(s) or organisation(s) specified herein. Unauthorised dissemination, copying of content, misuse or wrongful disclosure of information contained herein is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, unless the sender specifically states them to be the views of an organisation/employer. If you have received this email in error, delete it and contact the sender on +44 207 990 0900. Please rely on your own virus check as no responsibility is taken by the sender for damage arising from any virus infection this communication may contain

 

From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Huus
Sent: 22 April 2013 17:22
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Heuristic Dissector Priority

 

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Richard Maudsley <richard.maudsley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My plugin registers a UDP heuristic dissector which handles several protocols multiplexed on the same port. This is working fine, except that one of the built-in Wireshark dissectors is picking up packets before I get a chance to see them and blocks my dissector from running, even though I would be able to return TRUE from the dissector procedure and handle the packet.

 

If the dissector is incorrectly picking up the packet (ie it thinks it contains protocol X, but it doesn't) then file a bug against the heuristic used. If the dissector is correctly picking up the packet (ie the packet actually contains protocol X) then why does your plugin need to handle it? Presumably whatever you need to do can be done by improving the existing dissector or by using a tap.

 

At first I started looking for some sort of priority setting (a simple integer precedence on the dissector would have made sense), but it doesn’t look like such a thing exists. Then I started looking into more complicated solutions, such as disabling the offending dissector, allowing my dissector to run, and invoking it afterwards as a sub-dissector.

 

I'm a bit confused by this - are you wrapping an existing protocol in some special header, but the existing heuristic is skipping the header and jumping straight to the payload?

 

Cheers,
Evan