[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libmicrohttpd] Cannot set Content-Length in header

From: Christian Grothoff
Subject: Re: [libmicrohttpd] Cannot set Content-Length in header
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:56:57 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0

Hi Tim,

I didn't realize this was wget-*testing* related.

For your use-case, I agree that having an equivalent of the
can set a "-1" to "allow application to break the protocol" could be

I'd prefer having such a more "generic" option over a specific one to
just disable header checks. Alternatively, we could define a bit-field
option SANITY_CHECK to just disable certain sanity checks. WDYT?

Happy hacking!


On 10/25/19 9:48 AM, Tim Rühsen wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> for Wget2 we have to test and prepare for all kinds of malicious and
> misconfigured / misbehaving servers. So what you call a new feature is
> from our point of view a regression, since it breaks tests.
> Of course I understand your intention. But maybe we can have both by
> adding a new option to switch off the Content-Type checks ?
> Or a more general approach - a HEADER_CHECKS_OFF mode that make MHD just
> being "dumb" ?
> Regards, Tim
> On 10/24/19 7:42 PM, Christian Grothoff wrote:
>> Hi!
>> The MHD documentation explicitly says that MHD does NOT allow the
>> application to set the content-length header at all. You're likely
>> ignoring an error code you are getting back from the library when trying
>> to set the content-length header.
>> Also, not allowing applications to break the HTTP protocol is a feature,
>> not a bug. (That feature was indeed introduced around the versions you
>> mention ;-).)
>> Happy hacking!
>> Christian
>> On 10/24/19 6:25 PM, Archit Pandey wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> I'm working on the test-suite of wget2 that uses libmicrohttpd.
>>> I've noticed that on v0.9.66 MHD when I try setting an arbitrary value
>>> for Content-Length in the HTTP header, MHD changes it to the correct
>>> value. This behavior is not present on 0.9.59. Additionally, I could not
>>> find an option to revert to the previous behavior.
>>> Could this be a possible bug?
>>> -- 
>>> Archit Pandey
>>> Junior Year B.Tech.
>>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>>> National Institute of Technology Karnataka
>>> Surathkal, India

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]