"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 01:09:26AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> With the TLS socket, all data is encrypted on the wire. The TCP socket though
>> is still clear text. Fortunately some SASL authentication mechanism can
...
>> qemud/internal.h | 17 ++-
>> qemud/qemud.c | 207 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> qemud/remote.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++-
>> src/remote_internal.c | 283 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
Hi Dan,
I like the design and have started looking at the implementation.
I have two small suggestions so far:
> +#if HAVE_SASL
> +static int qemudClientReadSASL(struct qemud_server *server,
> + struct qemud_client *client) {
> + int got, want;
...
> + if (want > got)
> + want = got;
Barely worth mentioning, but...
The first time I read that, I didn't recognize right away that
it's essentially "want = MIN(want, got)". For such a test, I find
it more readable to reverse the inequality:
if (got < want)
want = got;
whatever.
...
> +#if HAVE_SASL
> +static int qemudClientWriteSASL(struct qemud_server *server,
> + struct qemud_client *client) {
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* Not got any pending encoded data, so we need to encode raw stuff */
> + if (client->saslEncoded == NULL) {
> + int err;
> + err = sasl_encode(client->saslconn,
> + client->buffer + client->bufferOffset,
> + client->bufferLength - client->bufferOffset,
> + &client->saslEncoded,
> + &client->saslEncodedLength);
> +
> + client->saslEncodedOffset = 0;
> + }
The documentation for sasl_encode suggests that it can fail in many ways.
I guess it needs the same "if (err != SASL_OK) { ... }" test as used in the
latter parts of this patch.
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list