martinhsv

If your memory leaks are not associated with rule reload, In v3.0.4 I am aware of the following less-used ModSecurity features that will leak memory: setenv (action) validateDTD (operator) validateSchema...

Hi @vncloudsco , I have not seen that particular compile error. One thing to pay attention to is the output of the ./configure step. The output may tell you about...

Hi @vncloudsco , Did you try checking your compiler version? E.g. ``` gcc --version ```

@kolotouros : No

@EvanBalster , (Re: "Previous versions of ModSecurity tolerated this omission." You must be referring to very old versions of ModSecurity, I think.) In general, you're right. Unless you're willing to...

Or, building on my suggestion (1) above: - as above, use a phase:1 rule to turn ```ctl:ruleEngine=detectionOnly``` - then, once the parsing is done, use a phase:2 rule to switch...

@EvanBalster , Re: "... so I would place this in a different category than the examples you mention." The absence of a proper final boundary in a multipart request makes...

Hi @brandonpayton , There are a few design assumptions here that I think might be worth considering. The population of your two new variables is 'first wins' -- i.e. they...

Merged. There were a couple of things cppcheck was flagging: a pre-existing exclusion whose line number needed adjusting and the couple of (false positive) unreadVariable alerts. I've handled those. I've...

Hello @kub3let , It's not clear from your posting what your situation is, but this issue was closed because it was resolved. If you are using ModSecurity >= v3.0.9, then...