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

bluetooth: Add some EIR fields #4273

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 12, 2024
Merged

Conversation

antoniovazquezblanco
Copy link
Contributor

@antoniovazquezblanco antoniovazquezblanco commented Feb 7, 2024

Checklist:

  • If you are new to Scapy: I have checked CONTRIBUTING.md (esp. section submitting-pull-requests)
  • I squashed commits belonging together
  • I added unit tests or explained why they are not relevant
  • I executed the regression tests (using cd test && ./run_tests or tox)
  • If the PR is still not finished, please create a Draft Pull Request

Bluetooth EIR packets.

Added few tests as I could not find data samples that I could share. I will try to collect some real world examples I can put there.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 7, 2024

Codecov Report

Merging #4273 (e95d088) into master (0a2b2bc) will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 95.23%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4273      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.03%   82.04%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         350      350              
  Lines       82888    82929      +41     
==========================================
+ Hits        67994    68036      +42     
+ Misses      14894    14893       -1     
Files Coverage Δ
scapy/fields.py 92.39% <100.00%> (ø)
scapy/layers/bluetooth.py 89.81% <95.12%> (+0.21%) ⬆️

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

@antoniovazquezblanco antoniovazquezblanco marked this pull request as ready for review February 7, 2024 19:54
@antoniovazquezblanco
Copy link
Contributor Author

As said previously, it is not easy to find those fields out in the wild to test this as acuratelly as possible...

I will add tests as soon as I come across a packet for the missing packets. For the time being I would like to merge the tested packets if possible. I can remove the untested packets from the PR if you wish so...

Thanks!

@antoniovazquezblanco
Copy link
Contributor Author

Would you prefer that I delete the non-tested packets or to leave them? Thanks

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.

Let's go with it. Thanks for your patience

@gpotter2 gpotter2 merged commit 86f034b into secdev:master Aug 12, 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.

2 participants