[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]

To: Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no>
Subject: Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
From: joda@pdc.kth.se (Johan Danielsson)
Date: 07 Aug 2000 15:22:32 +0200
Cc: heimdal-discuss@sics.se
In-Reply-To: Michael Shuldman's message of "Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:56:28 +0200"
References: <20000807130858.10267@bastesen.inet.no> <xof4s4xb5ns.fsf@blubb.pdc.kth.se> <20000807145628.40022@bastesen.inet.no>
Sender: owner-heimdal-discuss@sics.se
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5

Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no> writes:

I agree that the spec is somewhat unclear. I think that the MIT code
does the same (which is not an argument for either interpretation, but
it shows that we're not totally off-side).

> I would be more interested to know why Heimdal aborts as per my
> previous message.

You mean in gssapi_krb5_decapsulate? That's because the code wasn't
expecting an empty buffer, should be fixed 0.3a.

/Johan

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
  - From: Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no>

References:
- [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
  - From: Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no>
- Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
  - From: joda@pdc.kth.se (Johan Danielsson)
- Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
  - From: Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no>

Prev by Date: Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
Next by Date: Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
Prev by thread: Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
Next by thread: Re: [michaels@inet.no: Re: gss_accept_sec_context() problem]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread