| To: | netfilter@lists.netfilter.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | ipt_error_target in kernel difers from that in user space and causing "ip_tables: ERROR target: invalid size 30 != 32" |
| From: | "David Wu" <davidwu@arcturusnetworks.com> |
| Date: | Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:32:54 -0400 |
| Cc: | Michael Durrant <mdurrant@arcturusnetworks.com> |
| Delivered-to: | sp-com-lists@consult.net |
| Delivered-to: | netfilter-list1@securepoint.com |
| List-archive: | </pipermail/netfilter> |
| List-help: | <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help> |
| List-id: | General discussion and user questions <netfilter.lists.netfilter.org> |
| List-post: | <mailto:netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> |
| List-subscribe: | <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| Organization: | Arcturus Networks Inc. |
| Sender: | netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org |
| User-agent: | Opera M2/8.51 (Linux, build 1462) |
Hello all,I came across this problem when runing iptables-1.3.7 on 2.6.19 and 2.6.20 kernel(MCF5329):
ip_tables: ERROR target: invalid size 30 != 32
which comes from:
xt_check_target() (net/netfilter/x_tables.c)
if (XT_ALIGN(target->targetsize) != size) {
printk("%s_tables: %s target: invalid size %Zu != %u\n",
xt_prefix[family], target->name,
XT_ALIGN(target->targetsize), size);
return -EINVAL;
}
I noticed that in libiptc/libiptc.c(iptables-1.3.7) ipt_error_target is
defined as:
struct ipt_error_target
{
STRUCT_ENTRY_TARGET t;
char error[TABLE_MAXNAMELEN];
};
while in the kernel it defined as:
struct ipt_error_target
{
struct ipt_entry_target target;
char errorname[IPT_FUNCTION_MAXNAMELEN];
};
in net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c there is another:
static struct ipt_target ipt_error_target = {
.name = IPT_ERROR_TARGET,
.target = ipt_error,
.targetsize = IPT_FUNCTION_MAXNAMELEN,
.family = AF_INET,
};
TABLE_MAXNAMELEN and IPT_FUNCTION_MAXNAMELEN are not equal!!!
Is this a bug? Who can tell me which one is correct?
thanks,
--
David
davidwu@arcturusnetworks.com
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Debian 2.6.8/bridge/iptables/passive ftp, Pascal Hambourg |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Does iptables support VLANs, Elvir Kuric |
| Previous by Thread: | Debian 2.6.8/bridge/iptables/passive ftp, spaminator |
| Next by Thread: | Does iptables support VLANs, Elvir Kuric |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |