[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Add a test for verifying when username information can be leaked via differing nat settings

[mjordan]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#review4830
-----------------------------------------------------------



/asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/syncami.py
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment8999>

    Document someplace that you attempt a login during construction.  That's a side effect that may not be apparent.



/asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/syncami.py
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment8997>

    I wouldn't stop the reactor here.  Conceivably, you could have a test that was checking invalid logins over http - in which case they'd want the login to fail.  Stopping the reactor would kill their test.
    
    Instead, return true or false from here, and leave it up to the test case to determine if its a failure or not.



/asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/syncami.py
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment8998>

    Same here



/asterisk/trunk/lib/python/qm.py
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment9001>

    blob



/asterisk/trunk/lib/python/qm.py
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment9002>

    blob



/asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/run-test
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment9003>

    The testsuite was written using predominantly the old style calls to derived methods, as opposed to the new style.  We've begun moving in that direction, however you'll see both throughout the tests.



/asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/run-test
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/#comment9000>

    blob


- mjordan


On Nov. 17, 2011, 1:20 p.m., Terry Wilson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 17, 2011, 1:20 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers, Paul Belanger and mjordan.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This test loops through all combinations of nat=route/no (force_rport/no in 1.8+) for [general] and [peer] in sip.conf, whether or not the incoming request specified ;rport in the Via, and whether request was sent from the same port as the one listed in the Via, for both a valid and an invalid user. The test records when the behavior differs and matches against when we expect that behavior to differ for each version of Asterisk (1.4, 1.6.2, 1.8, 10, trunk). It also uses a Quine-McClusky minimization solver to reduce the list of failures to a function describing the failures. For example:
> On 1.4:
>     (((NOT port_matches_via) AND peer_nat AND (NOT general_nat)) OR ((NOT port_matches_via) AND (NOT peer_nat) AND general_nat))
> and 1.8:
>     (((NOT port_matches_via) AND (NOT rport_specified) AND (NOT peer_nat) AND general_nat) OR ((NOT port_matches_via) AND (NOT rport_specified) AND peer_nat AND (NOT general_nat)))
> 
> As you see, there is an extra term in 1.8 because in 1.8 we honor the ;rport in the Via no matter what, so differing behavior only occurs when a request comes in *not* specifying ;rport. There is no equivalent for nat=route or nat=never in 1.8+ (these values were originally added to work around a bug in old Uniden phone firmware).
> 
> This patch also adds a very small SyncAMI class for synchronously sending AMI requests (over HTTP because it is much simpler to do via HTTP's built-in request/response architecture) and getting back a response. It also modifies the default manager.conf and http.conf files to support the new API. SyncAMI makes it much easier to do things like update a config and reload it over AMI as you don't have to split up what you are doing into a lot of callback functions and you really do want to block execution until they are complete. Normally, I would have done a separate review for SyncAMI, but as this patch requires its use I've left them together for the review.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /asterisk/trunk/configs/branch-1.4/manager.conf 2750 
>   /asterisk/trunk/configs/http.conf PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/configs/manager.conf 2750 
>   /asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/syncami.py PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/lib/python/qm.py PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/configs/ast1/extensions.conf PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/configs/ast1/sip.conf PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/run-test PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/sipp/register.xml PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/nat_supertest/test-config.yaml PRE-CREATION 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/channels/SIP/tests.yaml 2750 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1590/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested against 1.4 and 1.8 and have gotten the values I expect back. The nat options for 1.4 and 1.6.2; and 1.8, 10, and trunk are the same, so I expect similar behavior there.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Terry
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20111121/c3b5bd3e/attachment-0001.htm>