Oliver Rauch wrote:
> > So you can't return data if you don't return SANE_STATUS_GOOD.
Thank You, Oliver, after I changes the EOF policy, our backend works
"smooth like wodka" (Pitr).
> Yes, but you also can argue that SANE_STATUS_EOF is not a failure,
> only the info that there is no more data than returned by
> this sane_read command. It does not hurt to mention it explictly.
By the way: Thank You for Xsane 0.76. It's getting nicer and nicer :-)
I did't look into the new scanning code, but 0.74 had in fact a
vulnerability (buffer overrun), if the backend offers actually more data
than was precalculated by the front end.
This is/was really a bug in the front end Xsane, because the parameters
to sane_read (aount of data requestet) don't mention the coming end of
the buffer (always requesting 64K/8K).
By *very* careful width/length prediction (and some paranoia checks) the
client can avoid the buffer smashing, but IMHO this is not the best way
to make the tiers robust (you have to trust the scanner). GIGO would be
perhaps better.:-)
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Yours sincerely
Marian Eichholz
- - - - - - - - - - -
Marian Eichholz
Postmaster
freenet.de AG Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Gerhard Schmid
Deelbögenkamp 4c Vorstand: Eckhard Spoerr (Vors.), Axel Krieger
22297 Hamburg Amtsgericht Hamburg, HRB 74048
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 08 2001 - 09:33:44 PDT