linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] string: use __builtin

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: <645bc156.170a0220.62d12.7fb3@mx.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 May 2023 09:07:50 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, andy@...nel.org,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com, nathan@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] string: use __builtin_memcpy() in strlcpy/strlcat

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 03:48:28PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> >
> > I *think* this isn't a problem for CONFIG_FORTIFY, since these will be
> > replaced and checked separately -- but it still seems strange that you
> > need to explicitly use __builtin_memcpy.
> >
> > Does this end up changing fortify coverage?
> 
> Is fortify relevant here? Note that the whole file is compiled with
> __NO_FORTIFY.

Yeah, agreed. I think I was just curious if that got verified. I'm good
with this.

Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook