well, one may have a la Bill Clinton discussion what sex means, but I think that equal means equal, and these two things are not equal, and should not be thus called so. I think it is a bug. anyone opposed to fixing it?
-jiri Miklos Tirpak wrote: > Hi all, > > I am wondering whether the != operator was designed to work the > following way with AVPs: > > ($myavp != "myvalue") is true only if $myavp exists, and its value is > not equal to "myvalue". If the AVP does not exist, the expression is false. > > That means, (!($myavp == "myvalue")) and ($myavp != "myvalue") may be > evaluated differently, the former is true if the AVP is missing. Is it a > bug or a feature? > > I also wonder whether the script writers know about this, for example > there was a security hole in ser-oob script because of it: I was able to > fake any sip uri (which was not provisioned) in the from HF of > non-register request, and the authentication was successful. > > Thanks, > Miklos > _______________________________________________ > Serdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev > _______________________________________________ Serdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
