[Nagiosplug-devel] RE: nagiosplug- check_snmp

[Karl DeBisschop]

I should also have said, if you have a patch that you tink corrects
these things (or some of them), maybe you should go ahead and apply it.
We can always back it out if we need to, but I suspect having you code
fixes someplace where we can all see them will just make it faster to
get to the point where we're ready to include it in the release.

On Fri, 2002-11-15 at 07:18, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-11-15 at 00:12, Subhendu Ghosh wrote:
> > Another issue in check_snmp - process_arguments()
> > 
> > case 's' and case 'r'
> > 
> > eval_method[jj++] can go out of bounds.  
> > 
> > Since we are only supporting one string match or regex match - and 
> > always for the last provided OID, should not increment jj.
> 
> ISTM it would be nice to not require that it be the last OID. Actually,
> I'd like to be able to check more than one string, but that can wait.
> 
> So what it really needs is just a check against MAX_OID (or we need to
> change that structure and realloc eval_method). In general, I support
> removing precomiled limits.
> 
> > How jj is determined is an issue since there are a couple of pathways
> > through the switch statement depending on the order of the arguments on
> > the command line.
> 
> Yes there are several paths. In my thinking, there are sort of three
> forks -- jj gets incremented by either
> 
> 1) a string test (-s, -r, -R)
> 2) an existence test (-e, -E, when they really work)
> 3) an integer test (-w and -c)
> 
> But the last is unique in that you need to allow both WARN and CRIT
> specifications.
> 
> Overall, there's alot of work that can be done to clean up that
> processing. For the release, unless there are serious objections, maybe
> we don't need to commit to making it truly bullet proof. As long as it's
> possible to specify what the docs say you can, I suggest deferring a
> major rewrite for 1.3.1
> 
> But a rewrite is probably waranted.
> 
> > So long as -s and -r are specifed immediately after -o, we are ok.  If we 
> > get -w, or -c between -o and -s/-r : we will have out of bounds.
> 
> Can't we just add a check against MAX_OID?
-- 
Karl DeBisschop <karl at debisschop.net>