From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932239Ab3E0MUn (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2013 08:20:43 -0400 Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:42762 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932177Ab3E0MUl (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2013 08:20:41 -0400 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from 127.0.0.1 by antivirus3 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.10 (clamdscan: 0.97.8/17272. spamassassin: 3.3.2. Clear:RC:1(127.0.0.1):SA:0(-97.2/7.5):. Processed in 5.232836 secs); 27 May 2013 12:20:39 -0000 X-Envelope-From: pneira@us.es Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 14:20:33 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Jiri Slaby Cc: jirislaby@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Mahoney , Patrick McHardy , "David S. Miller" , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -resend 4/6] netfilter: Implement RFC 1123 for FTP conntrack Message-ID: <20130527122033.GA16107@localhost> References: <1369227552-11743-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> <1369227552-11743-4-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1369227552-11743-4-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:59:10PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > From: Jeff Mahoney > > The FTP conntrack code currently only accepts the following format for > the 227 response for PASV: > 227 Entering Passive Mode (148,100,81,40,31,161). > > It doesn't accept the following format from an obscure server: > 227 Data transfer will passively listen to 67,218,99,134,50,144 > > From RFC 1123: > The format of the 227 reply to a PASV command is not > well standardized. In particular, an FTP client cannot > assume that the parentheses shown on page 40 of RFC-959 > will be present (and in fact, Figure 3 on page 43 omits > them). Therefore, a User-FTP program that interprets > the PASV reply must scan the reply for the first digit > of the host and port numbers. Applied, thanks.