-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
RadioTap flags support + Dot11 FCS&improvements #1381
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1381 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 85.2% 85.27% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 174 174
Lines 40378 40609 +231
==========================================
+ Hits 34403 34630 +227
- Misses 5975 5979 +4
|
|
This seems to be working to me (tested on both Ubuntu Linux and macOS 10.13). Any idea when we can get scapy 2.4.1? I'd love to use this as soon as possible in my project (https://github.com/calebmadrigal/trackerjacker). |
scapy/layers/dot11.py
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Original PPI author?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From the contributor modules
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I meant to change "PPI author:" to "Original PPI author:".
|
I restarted the failing test. |
p-l-
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think PPI related stuff should be handled in a dedicated layer file, not in dot11, as it is not specific to dot11. What do you think?
scapy/contrib/ppi_geotag.py
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you limit what is imported here?
|
@p-l- Updated: moved |
|
Can you rebase against current master? We have a conflict due to removed tests. |
guedou
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. @p-l- are the changes OK?
|
@gpotter2 this PR conflicts. |
|
Fixed conflicts |
|
@gpotter2 Any ETA on a 2.4.1 release? It'd be great prior to DEF CON 2018! :) |
|
Oh, you’re not the first one wanting 2.4.1 for DEF CON :) I have created a project a few days ago, but I doubt it will be ready for August... Why do you need 2.4.1 ? Can’t you just use the dev build ? You can even install it via pip with git (lookup) |
|
@gpotter2 I basically just need the stuff in this PR. I could use a dev build for personal use, but I'd like a nice clean pip "scapy==2.4.1" for dependency management. |
|
We still have stuff to check :/ Other maintainers don’t have much time to check all of those, as currently preparing for BlackHat. For DEF CON you should be able to use the dev release, we’ll try to provide 2.4.1 ASAP |
|
I am not sure that v2.4.1 will be released before the conference =\
If we cannot do it, you can try to specify a git commit in requirements.txt
|
This PR:
pkt._tmp_dissect_pos)pkt._tmp_dissect_pos. It is a variable which contains the size of the current layer, at the time that it is used, and can only be used during the dissection. It is very useful inlength_fromfunctions, as it gets what has been exactly dissected when the lambda gets executed. It is changing dynamicallyPPI()layer was implemented twice.