linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] security/selinux: decrement sizeof size in strncmp

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]

Message-ID: <1258170491.16857.142.camel@Joe-Laptop.home>
Date:	Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:48:11 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	David Wagner <daw-news@...erner.cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] security/selinux: decrement sizeof size in strncmp

On Sat, 2009-11-14 at 03:44 +0000, David Wagner wrote:
> I personally don't find
>     strncmp(foo, "constant", sizeof("constant"))        // first snippet
> to be more readable, auditable, or obviously correct than
>     strcmp(foo, "constant").                            // second snippet
> Is there a technical basis for arguing that the first
> snippet is better than the second snippet?

I don't think there is.

--
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/