As per #738, there are usecases where the DNS TXT record strings should
not be concatenated like RFC 7208 indicates. We cannot break ABI with
those using the new API, so we need to support retrieving the
concatenated version as well as a new API to retrieve the individual
strings which will be used by `ares_parse_text_reply_ext()` to restore
the old behavior prior to c-ares 1.20.
Fixes Issue: #738
Fix By: Brad House (@bradh352)
Add code annotations for ignoring specific code paths for coverage
calculations. The primary purpose of this is to make it easy to see the
code paths that we could (and probably should) write test cases for, as
these would have the most impact on delivery of a stable product.
The annotations used are:
`LCOV_EXCL_LINE: <designation>`, `LCOV_EXCL_START: <designation>`,
`LCOV_EXCL_STOP`
Unfortunately `LCOV_EXCL_BR_LINE` does not appear to be supported by
coveralls as it would have been a more elegant solution over START/STOP.
We specifically include the `<designation>` not just for future
reference but because it makes it easy to identify in case we want to
address these conditions in a different way in the future.
The main areas designated for exclusion are:
1. `OutOfMemory` - these are hard to test cases, and on modern systems,
are likely to never occur due to optimistic memory allocations, which
can then later cause the kernel to terminate your application due to
memory not actually being available. c-ares does have *some* testing
framework for this, if we wish to expand in the future, we can easily
use sed to get rid of of these annotations.
2. `DefensiveCoding` - these are impossible to reach paths at the point
in time the code was written. They are there for defensive coding in
case code is refactored in the future to prevent unexpected behavior.
3. `UntestablePath` - these are code paths that aren't possible to test,
such as failure of a system call.
4. `FallbackCode` - This is an entire set of code that is untestable
because its not able to simulate a failure of the primary path.
This PR also does add some actual coverage in the test cases where it is
easy to do.
Fix By: Brad House (@bradh352)
New DNS record parsing code. The old code was basically just some helper macros and functions for parsing an entire DNS message. The caller had to know the RFCs to use the parsers, except for some pre-made exceptions. The new parsing code parses the entire DNS message into an opaque data structure in a memory safe manner with various accessors for reading and manipulating the data.
The existing parser helpers for the various record types were reimplemented as wrappers around the new parser.
The accessors allow easy iteration across the DNS record datastructure, and can be used to easily create dig-like output without needing to know anything about the various record types and formats as dynamic helpers are provided for enumeration of values and data types of those values.
At some point in the future, this new DNS record structure, accessors, and parser will be exposed publicly. This is not done at this point as we don't want to do that until the API is completely stable. Likely a write() function to output the DNS record back into an actual message buffer will be introduced with the stable API as well.
Some subtle bugs in the existing code were uncovered, some which had test cases which turned out to be bogus. Validation with third-party implementations (e.g. BIND9) were performed to validate such cases were indeed bugs.
Adding additional RR parsers such as for TLSA (#470) or SVCB/HTTPS (#566) are trivial now since focus can be put on only parsing the data within the RR, not the entire message. That said, as the new parser is not yet public, it isn't clear the best way to expose any new RRs (probably best to wait for the new parser to be public rather than hacking in another legacy function).
Some additional RRs that are part of DNS RFC1035 or EDNS RFC6891 that didn't have previously implemented parsers are now also implemented (e.g. HINFO, OPT). Any unrecognized RRs are encapsulated into a "RAW_RR" as binary data which can be inserted or extracted, but are otherwise not interpreted in any way.
Fix By: Brad House (@bradh352)
All files have their licence and copyright information clearly
identifiable. If not in the file header, they are set separately in
.reuse/dep5.
All used license texts are provided in LICENSES/
The rc4 function iterates over a buffer of size buffer_len who's maximum
value is INT_MAX with a counter of type short that is not guaranteed to
have maximum size INT_MAX.
In circumstances where short is narrower than int and where buffer_len
is larger than the maximum value of a short, it may be possible to loop
infinitely as counter will overflow and never be greater than or equal
to buffer_len.
The solution is to make the comparison be between types of equal width.
This commit defines counter as an int.
Fix By: Fionn Fitzmaurice (@fionn)
Brad House
Daniel Stenberg
Fionn Fitzmaurice