Message290609
The change in issue #29100 - intended AFAICS simply to fix a regression in 3.6 - seems to have made datetime validation via certain code paths stricter than it was in 2.7 or 3.5. I think it's the case that some routes via the C API now reject out of range values that were previously permitted. Even if this previous behaviour was incorrect, was it intentional to alter that in a maintenance release?
Here's a quick example using pywin32:
---
> import getpass, sspi, sspicon, win32security
> client_name = getpass.getuser()
> auth_info = (client_name, 'wherever.com', None)
> pkg_info = win32security.QuerySecurityPackageInfo('Kerberos')
> win32security.AcquireCredentialsHandle(
> client_name, pkg_info['Name'],
> sspicon.SECPKG_CRED_OUTBOUND,
> None, auth_info)
ValueError: year 30828 is out of range
---
Of course, this is probably a mishandling of the 'never expires' value returned by the Windows API in this case, and indeed I have also created a pywin32 ticket. However, I'm guessing that the linked issue wasn't supposed to break such code. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2017-03-27 13:48:47 | m-parry | set | recipients:
+ m-parry |
2017-03-27 13:48:47 | m-parry | set | messageid: <1490622527.46.0.936939014549.issue29921@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2017-03-27 13:48:47 | m-parry | link | issue29921 messages |
2017-03-27 13:48:47 | m-parry | create | |
|