From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C23171FF136 for ; Mon, 04 May 2026 14:53:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 540FF212E0; Mon, 4 May 2026 14:53:04 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabian=20Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Robert Obkircher Subject: applied: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 proxmox-ve-rs] fix #6399: firewall: fix parsing rule comments that contain hash signs Date: Mon, 4 May 2026 14:52:22 +0200 Message-ID: <177789911575.631096.655963133568499090.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20251215123925.168475-1-r.obkircher@proxmox.com> References: <20251215123925.168475-1-r.obkircher@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1777899044922 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.054 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: UQG7X6AYGDRPAAQU6XY4BN4YCF4NBMPO X-Message-ID-Hash: UQG7X6AYGDRPAAQU6XY4BN4YCF4NBMPO X-MailFrom: f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 13:38:58 +0100, Robert Obkircher wrote: > Match the behavior of the corresponding perl code in parse_fw_rule and > treat everything after the first '#' on a line as the comment. This > works because validation prevents fields like the interface name from > contianing that symbol. > > This fixes a bug where the firewall wouldn't start if a comment on a > rule contained a number sign. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] fix #6399: firewall: fix parsing rule comments that contain hash signs commit: d598628c17bd5da1f3a0bf1fd4e81dc7e51dbcec Best regards, -- Fabian Grünbichler