-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
fix: include carriage return in multipartform.decode() #10270
Conversation
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #10270 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #10270 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.77% 98.77%
=======================================
Files 122 122
Lines 37029 37029
Branches 2041 2041
=======================================
Hits 36577 36577
Misses 313 313
Partials 139 139
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
the `MultipartForm.decode()` function has a bare newline follow the initial boundary. in RFC1341 7.2.1, a boundary is defined to be followed by a `CRLF` this updates the function to utilize a `CRLF` instead
|
Looks like my mistake. Thanks. |
Backport to 3.11: 💚 backport PR created✅ Backport PR branch: Backported as #10274 🤖 @patchback |
(cherry picked from commit 2a55afe)
Backport to 3.12: 💚 backport PR created✅ Backport PR branch: Backported as #10275 🤖 @patchback |
(cherry picked from commit 2a55afe)
Super easy one to make! I only happened to catch it because I was running a stricter web server that got grumpy :) |
What do these changes do?
The
MultipartForm.decode()function has a bare newline follow theinitial boundary. However, in RFC1341 7.2.1
a boundary is defined to be followed by a
CRLF.This updates the
decodefunction to utilize aCRLFinstead for the initial boundary.Are there changes in behavior for the user?
No.
Is it a substantial burden for the maintainers to support this?
No.
Related issue number
Checklist
CONTRIBUTORS.txtCHANGES/foldername it
<issue_or_pr_num>.<type>.rst(e.g.588.bugfix.rst)if you don't have an issue number, change it to the pull request
number after creating the PR
.bugfix: A bug fix for something the maintainers deemed animproper undesired behavior that got corrected to match
pre-agreed expectations.
.feature: A new behavior, public APIs. That sort of stuff..deprecation: A declaration of future API removals and breakingchanges in behavior.
.breaking: When something public is removed in a breaking way.Could be deprecated in an earlier release.
.doc: Notable updates to the documentation structure or buildprocess.
.packaging: Notes for downstreams about unobvious side effectsand tooling. Changes in the test invocation considerations and
runtime assumptions.
.contrib: Stuff that affects the contributor experience. e.g.Running tests, building the docs, setting up the development
environment.
.misc: Changes that are hard to assign to any of the abovecategories.
Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation,
for example:
Use the past tense or the present tense a non-imperative mood,
referring to what's changed compared to the last released version
of this project.