You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Instead of using a hard-coded max size for receiving UDP packets limits what kind of extensions can be made in the future as older clients would simply drop incoming packets that they consider too large, even if technically the Mumble protocol now allows larger packets.
Thus, it would be better to simply take packets in the size in which they come, with some sane upper bound to prevent malicious packets from overflowing a peer.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Maybe we should increase the default size limit to 4096 or so.
That would still be a hard-limit. The idea is to essentially accept any package size length and resize the buffer dynamically as needed. And in order to not be vulnerable to malicious packages, we should have a hard upper bound, but that should be at least an order of magnitude larger than the largest expected package (maybe around 500KiB or so)
Instead of using a hard-coded max size for receiving UDP packets limits what kind of extensions can be made in the future as older clients would simply drop incoming packets that they consider too large, even if technically the Mumble protocol now allows larger packets.
Thus, it would be better to simply take packets in the size in which they come, with some sane upper bound to prevent malicious packets from overflowing a peer.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: