init: Add bounds checking to -port #24344
Conversation
|
Since this patch touches the init pathway, it does not appear to be a good candidate for unit testing. And a functional test case for this behavior did not appear to belong in any existing functional test (a new test seems too heavy handed). Please advise. |
|
Isn't this already being addressed in #22087 ? |
Looks like it. I will comment there since the bounds checking is not sufficient. |
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
|
Closing as a duplicate of #22087. The comments were left and addressed in that PR. |
0452678 Validate `port` options (amadeuszpawlik) f8387c4 Validate port value in `SplitHostPort` (amadeuszpawlik) Pull request description: Validate `port`-options, so that invalid values are rejected early in the startup. Ports are `uint16_t`s, which effectively limits a port's value to <=65535. As discussed in bitcoin/bitcoin#24116 and bitcoin/bitcoin#24344, port "0" is considered invalid too. Proposed in bitcoin/bitcoin#21893 (comment) The `SplitHostPort(std::string in, uint16_t& portOut, std::string& hostOut)` now returns a bool that indicates whether the port value was set and within the allowed range. This is an improvement that can be used not only for port validation of options at startup, but also in rpc calls, etc, ACKs for top commit: luke-jr: utACK 0452678 ryanofsky: Code review ACK 0452678. Just suggested changes since last review: reverting some SplitHostPort changes, adding release notes, avoiding 'GetArgs[0]` problem. Tree-SHA512: f1ac80bf98520b287a6413ceadb41bc3a93c491955de9b9319ee1298ac0ab982751905762a287e748997ead6198a8bb7a3bc8817ac9e3d2468e11ab4a0f8496d
Specifying ports outside of the bounds of 1 - 65535 give unexpected behaviors:
This patch alerts the user that port numbers in these ranges are invalid.