Control: tags -1 +moreinfo Hi Julian, and thanks for your bugreport, Le dimanche, 25 octobre 2015, 23.26:07 Julian Gilbey a écrit : > I've flagged this as important because it could lead to a DoS attack > potentially. (It filled up my whole disk partition until I located > the source of the problem.) I am utterly bemused as to what might be > causing this problem.... > > Situation: I have a Samsung ML-1610 printer connected to a machine > running Debian testing. I can print from the server with no problem. > However, I have tried printing to it from another Debian testing > machine and from an Apple MacBook running OSX 10.11, and they both end > up flooding the log file. Which log file ? /var/log/cups/error_log ? What disk space does this partition have? How big was the file when you hit the disk space limit? > This must have started relatively recently, as I certainly used to be > able to print from a remote computer. I have tried using the foomatic > ppds and also tried installing the suld packages from > http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/ to no avail. You should use the 'splix' driver as shipped in 'printer-driver-splix'. As far as I could tell, it is supposed to work fine for your printer. > My cupsd.conf file reads as follows, heavily based on the sample > configuration file: > > ----- > # Log general information in error_log - change "warn" to "debug" > # for troubleshooting... > LogLevel debug This statement certainly doesn't help keeping the log small. :) > Part of the very long error_log file reads as follows, showing the > whole of "Client 106"; this pattern is repeated again and again with > different client numbers. The most interesting (though perhaps > misleading) comment is that no authentication data is provided. This looks weird indeed. That said, can you reproduce this with only Debian packages (cups + printer-driver-splix configured for that printer) ? I'm not entirely dismissing an error from CUPS though: Steve Langasek reported the same bug on Ubuntu: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1421252 It looks like there's a weird {un-,}authentication loop happening there. Cheers, OdyX
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.