[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0808301234k3fae5572xdd8835827201f15@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:34:21 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: "Tom Tucker" <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
"Neil Brown" <neilb@...e.de>,
"Chuck Lever" <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, "Greg Banks" <gnb@....com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...i.umich.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: buffer overflow in /proc/sys/sunrpc/transports
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> | Hm. I think this is wrong. Shouldn't we copy as many bytes as the user
> | indicated?
>
> Well, hard to say what user-space programmer is expecting from us.
> I mean - maybe he (reader) wants only part of results not the whole
> contents BUT by this way he never know what the whole conetnts would be
> until trying to read more (ie to check if there no more data from
> kernel side). What is preferred behaviour - i don't know :)
For any other file, read(1) + read(1) should be exactly equivalent to
a read(2). What's the difference here?
(Btw, thanks for the quick reply :-))
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists