linux-hardening - Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/3] Fix inefficiences and rename nla

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:58:36 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/3] Fix inefficiences and rename nla_strlcpy

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 09:45:15AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 17:23:28 +0200 laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com
> wrote:
> > To sum up, the first patch fixes an inefficiency where some bytes in dst were
> > written twice, one with 0 the other with src content.
> > The second one modifies nla_strlcpy to return the same value as strscpy,
> > i.e. number of bytes written or -E2BIG if src was truncated.
> > The third rename nla_strlcpy to nla_strcpy.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, I did not find how to create struct nlattr objects so I tested
> > my modifications on simple char*.
> > This is why I tag this patch set as RFC.
> > 
> > If you see any way to improve the code or have any remark, feel free to comment.
> 
> You follow semantics of strscpy, yet rename to strcpy. Wouldn't it be
> more intuitive for developers to rename to nla_strscpy?

It's closer to strscpy_pad() but that seems a long name. What's
preferred from the NLA perspective?

-- 
Kees Cook