These well-known flags and replies are part of the D-Bus Specification,
and also exist with the same names in libdbus header files.
Moving them into a private header means that unit tests like
gdbus-proxy-threads and gdbus-subscribe don't have to reinvent them.
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
This was a bug that existed during development of this branch; make sure
it doesn't come back.
This test fails with a use-after-free and crash if we comment out the
part of name_watcher_unref_watched_name() that removes the name watcher
from `map_method_serial_to_name_watcher`.
It would also fail with an assertion failure if we asserted in
name_watcher_unref_watched_name() that get_name_owner_serial == 0
(i.e. that GetNameOwner is not in-flight at destruction).
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
The vulnerability reported as GNOME/glib#3268 can be characterized
as: these signals from an attacker should not be delivered to either
the GDBusConnection or the GDBusProxy, but in fact they are (in at
least some scenarios).
Reproduces: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues/3268
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
The expected result is that because TEST_CONN_SERVICE owns
ALREADY_OWNED_NAME but not (yet) OWNED_LATER_NAME, the signal will be
delivered to the subscriber for the former but not the latter.
Before #3268 was fixed, it was incorrectly delivered to both.
Reproduces: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues/3268 (partially)
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
On GNOME/glib#3268 there was some concern about whether this would
allow an attacker to send signals and have them be matched to a
GDBusProxy in this situation, but it seems that was a false alarm.
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
This somewhat duplicates test_connection_signals(), but is easier to
extend to cover different scenarios.
Each scenario is tested three times: once with lower-level
GDBusConnection APIs, once with the higher-level GDBusProxy (which
cannot implement all of the subscription scenarios, so some message
counts are lower), and once with both (to check that delivery of the
same message to multiple destinations is handled appropriately).
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@collabora.com>
