FYI the code does not apply as-is to the older versions. The changelog/header entries can easily be matched, but the options.c code essentially needs a rewrite to match the older versions - the ttl handling was different and also the code was in other places.
At least it would be one backport as 2.68 and 2.75 seem to have more or less the same code for this section. But I wonder how much risk we should go potentially making a bad backport or if we should consider this being a bad configuration. At those more experienced, while a crash is always bad - is this "just" a case happing in a bad config? It seems to violate this from the man page "--cname=<cname>,[<cname>,]<target>[,<TTL>] [...] The cname must be unique," but isn't all to clear there and obviously a fault isn't the best response even to a misconfig. Or can there be external influences that make it affect you - like people redefining their DNS to cause you to have a loop - not sure how real that would be? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1782362 Title: dnsmasq segfaults on cnames referring to themselves To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/1782362/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
