Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Nov 2003 22:33:48 +0000 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6]: IPv6: strcpy -> strlcpy |
| |
On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 10:19:28PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > Note: we should really fix the generic strncpy() - there are places in > the kernel source which rely on the x86 strncpy() behaviour today (eg, > binfmt_*.c core file generation.)
Sorry, bad example. Hmm, from a glance around, it seems that all of the places which use strncpy() implicitly zero the buffer prior to using strncpy().
This means that the x86 strncpy is doing unnecessary zeroing. I do remember Alan complaining about the last set of strlcpy() stuff introducing information leaks - maybe those got fixed though.
Ok, I don't know where the kernel stands on this issue anymore. Can someone definitively provide a statement of exactly what the kernel expects of strncpy() ?
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |