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
|