linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Introduce support for Systems Management Driver over WMI for Dell Systems

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: <CAHp75VdOYk0xRKPzTygAMiEiSAmJZBrawZKSjPHiwzd8AbXfiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 15:08:57 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Divya Bharathi <divya27392@...il.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Divya Bharathi <divya_bharathi@...l.com>,
        mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@...l.com>,
        Prasanth KSR <prasanth.ksr@...l.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Introduce support for Systems Management Driver over
 WMI for Dell Systems

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:08 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:38 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On 9/17/20 8:55 AM, Divya Bharathi wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Now I see that you try to correctly deal with strncpy-s nastiness
> > everywhere, but please just don't use it all.
> > Not using strncpy at all is much better.
> >
> > A lot of the strncpy usage is hidden in:
> >
> > strncpy_attr(char *dest, char *src)
> > {
> >          size_t len = strlen(src) + 1;
> >
> >          if (len > 1 && len < MAX_BUFF)
> >                  strncpy(dest, src, len);
> > }
> >
> > Why is there no warning printed when the source string
> > is too long ? Now we just quietly throw away the
> > data, which seems undesirable.
> >
> > Also wouldn't truncating the data to fit in MAX_BUFF be better?
> > (honest question, I do not know which option is better)
>
> And don't forget new compiler warning if it can prove that string will
> be NUL-terminated.

can -> can't


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko