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]
Message-ID: <1425040579.2690.9.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Feb 2015 04:36:19 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] wireless: test sscanf return values

On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 10:35 +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Joe Perches
> > At some point, it'd be good to make sscanf use __must_check
> > so make sure the net/ uses of sscanf use the return value.
> 
> Isn't it much safer to avoid sscanf() completely and use
> a different function for converting numerics?

It's generally better to use something other than sscanf.
That doesn't mean sscanf isn't useful.



--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ