| To: | "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@" <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Off-by-one bug at unix_mkname ? |
| From: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:49:53 -0800 |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, from-linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050328.173938.26746686.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> |
| References: | <200503281700.HHE91205.FtVLOStGOSPMYJFMN@I-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20050328.172108.30349253.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <20050328.173938.26746686.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 05:39:38PM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@ wrote: > + /* > + * This may look like an off by one error but it is > + * a bit more subtle. 108 is the longest valid AF_UNIX > + * path for a binding. sun_path[108] doesnt as such > + * exist. However in kernel space we are guaranteed that > + * it is a valid memory location in our kernel > + * address buffer. icky pointless white space? > + */ > + if (len > sizeof(*sunaddr)) what? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Off-by-one bug at unix_mkname ?, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Off-by-one bug at unix_mkname ?, Jan Engelhardt |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Off-by-one bug at unix_mkname ?, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Off-by-one bug at unix_mkname ?, Jan Engelhardt |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |