IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [websec] mimesniff feedback, part 2

Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Sat, 26 November 2011 04:26 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@adambarth.com>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51B4021F8AB8 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9d4KZl5ReBrl for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEAEB21F8A69 for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so6543072iae.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.61.210 with SMTP id u18mr72030ibh.86.1322281597432; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j1sm62370932igq.2.2011.11.25.20.26.36 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so6543033iae.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.217.195 with SMTP id pa3mr40530590igc.12.1322281596113; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.67.130 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:05 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <op.v5icng1csr6mfa@kirk>
References: <op.v5icng1csr6mfa@kirk>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:26:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia81jBN1hmpUG-0fupHd=XfcWwxJZKN1sbZ2PkuSZmvOcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "websec@ietf.org" <websec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [websec] mimesniff feedback, part 2
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Web Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <websec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/websec>
List-Post: <mailto:websec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:26:38 -0000

Yes.  Bid-endian is correct.  The IETF draft you're reading expired on
November 8.

Adam


On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote:
> A rather serious issue in "Signature for MP4": the spec says that box size
> is little-endian, but every .mp4 file I have tested are in fact big-endian.
> For example, here's a hexdump of the beginning of sample_100kbit.mp4, a
> sample file from Darwin Streaming Server 6.0.3:
>
> 00000000  00 00 00 18 66 74 79 70  6d 70 34 32 00 00 00 01
>  |....ftypmp42....|
> 00000010  6d 70 34 32 6d 70 34 31 00 00 5a eb 6d 6f 6f 76
>  |mp42mp41..Z.moov|
> 00000020  00 00 00 6c 6d 76 68 64  00 00 00 00 be 44 3f 8d
>  |...lmvhd.....D?.|
>
> --
> Philip Jägenstedt
> Core Developer
> Opera Software
> _______________________________________________
> websec mailing list
> websec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email