linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/3] lib/string: search for NUL with strchr/strnchr

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190506124205.6565-1-peda@axentia.se>
Date:   Mon, 6 May 2019 12:42:14 +0000
From:   Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
To:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] lib/string: search for NUL with strchr/strnchr

Hi!

I noticed an inconsistency where strchr and strnchr do not behave the
same with respect to the trailing NUL. strchr is standardised and the
kernel function conforms, and the kernel relies on the behavior.
So, naturally strchr stays as-is and strnchr is what I change.

While writing a few tests to verify that my new strnchr loop was sane, I
noticed that the tests for memset16/32/64 had a problem. Since it's all
about the lib/string.c file I made a short series of it all...

But where to send it? get_maintainer suggests no victim, so I'm aiming
at those that signed-off on the memset16/32/64 bug...

Cheers,
Peter

Peter Rosin (3):
  lib/string: allow searching for NUL with strnchr
  lib/test_string: avoid masking memset16/32/64 failures
  lib/test_string: add some testcases for strchr and strnchr

 lib/string.c      | 11 +++++++-
 lib/test_string.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
2.11.0