linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH] drivers/iio: Remove all strcpy() uses in favor of strscpy()

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 7 Aug 2021 17:02:06 +0200
From:   Len Baker <len.baker@....com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     Len Baker <len.baker@....com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/iio: Remove all strcpy() uses in favor of
 strscpy()

Hi,

On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 08:55:28PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sun,  1 Aug 2021 19:11:57 +0200
> Len Baker <len.baker@....com> wrote:
>
> > strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer. This
> > could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer, leading
> > to all kinds of misbehaviors. The safe replacement is strscpy().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Len Baker <len.baker@....com>
>
> Hi Len,
>
> I'm not convinced this is terribly useful in this particular case.
> As the code stands today, it is easy to verify that the buffer is
> large enough by looking up a few lines. As you need to do that
> anyway to check that n, n -1 in the strscpy is correct, what do we gain?
>
> I don't mind this if it's part of a general removal of strcpy(), but
> if so the patch description should state that.

Ok, I will send a new version with the commit changelog updated.

Regards,
Len