2 ms·
> Any ip like 2001:0000:0000::1 is going to be incorrect. This is neither a possible input nor a possible output of that code.
by remram 1y ago
> Any ip like 2001:0000:0000::1 is going to be incorrect.
This is neither a possible input nor a possible output of that code.
- dontdoxxme 1y agoThat example doesn't work, but an IPv6 address like: 3fff:0020:: Would be in the IP SAN as 3fff0020000000000000000000000000, which this code expands: "3fff0020000000000000000000000000" .toLowerCase() .match(/.{1,4}/g) .join(":") .replace(/\b:?(?:0+:?){2,}/, "::") '3fff::20:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000' Which has one too many parts and doesn't parse as an IPv6 address. But like mentioned this is just presentation code. I don't want to waste time if this isn't actually a bug, but maybe someone on the LetsEncrypt trial could actually make a cert to see if IP addresses formatted like that are a problem in reality...
- remram 1y agoThat one does look like a bug. I stand corrected.