Invalid whitespace continued #277
Merged
+92
−6
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
digitalresistor
force-pushed
the
invalid-whitespace-cont
branch
from
5313e98 to
41732a5
Compare
digitalresistor
commented
Jan 2, 2020
mmerickel
reviewed
Jan 2, 2020
mmerickel
reviewed
Jan 2, 2020
Continuation/follow-up for: GHSA-m5ff-3wj3-8ph4 which showcased the initial problem with the way that waitress was dealing with whitespace in headers. Additional testing by ZeddYu Lu also led to other potential issues with non-printable ascii characters that are stripped by default by Python's string.strip() function
digitalresistor
force-pushed
the
invalid-whitespace-cont
branch
from
41732a5 to
3a54e29
Compare
mmerickel
approved these changes
Jan 2, 2020
This was referenced Mar 11, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow-up to existing security issue: GHSA-m5ff-3wj3-8ph4
This makes sure that we don't accidentally strip more than we should from a header value before comparison which could have opened Waitress up to treating the request different from a potential front-end.
While here, tighten up the RFC7230 regex I wrote to match the errata that was published.