Skip to content
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

Add SSL support for DoIP sockets #4327

Merged
merged 2 commits into from May 1, 2024
Merged

Add SSL support for DoIP sockets #4327

merged 2 commits into from May 1, 2024

Conversation

polybassa
Copy link
Contributor

@polybassa polybassa commented Mar 20, 2024

This PR adds SSL functionality for DoIP Sockets.

In order to provide SSL functionality, the recv() function of existing DoIP socket needed to be refactored.

The SSL DoIP Sockets work the same way as existing DoIP sockets, only a SslContext has to be provided.

Additionally, this PR adds unit tests for the new recv() function and the SSL DoIPSockets.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 20, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.94624% with 14 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.21%. Comparing base (ac3d5bb) to head (30a3d48).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4327      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.20%   82.21%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         353      353              
  Lines       83529    83586      +57     
==========================================
+ Hits        68662    68719      +57     
  Misses      14867    14867              
Files Coverage Δ
scapy/contrib/automotive/doip.py 88.88% <84.94%> (+12.69%) ⬆️

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

@gpotter2
Copy link
Member

Could you add a PR summary? Thanks.

@polybassa
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gpotter2 Done

gpotter2
gpotter2 previously approved these changes Apr 27, 2024
Copy link
Member

@gpotter2 gpotter2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Could you rebase against master? Thanks

@polybassa
Copy link
Contributor Author

LGTM. Could you rebase against master? Thanks

Done!

@polybassa polybassa requested a review from gpotter2 April 30, 2024 07:42
@gpotter2 gpotter2 merged commit 8cea357 into secdev:master May 1, 2024
23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants