[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241011193047.0b788145@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 19:30:47 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Kees
Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: replace multiple deprecated strncpy with
strscpy
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 14:59:16 -0700
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com> wrote:
> So, assuming I haven't lost your faith, I can send a v2 along the lines of:
Not yet ;-)
>
> 1)
> strscpy(num_buf, str + s, len + 1);
>
> ... or
> 2)
> memcpy(num_buf, str + s, len);
> num_buf[len] = 0;
>
> And if you're wondering about option 3: "Don't change anything because
> the code works". I'd reiterate that I think it's important to replace
> bad ambiguous APIs. There are many cases where folks use strncpy() as
> a glorified memcpy because they want the padding behavior, or they use
> it on non-null terminated destinations or tons of other "misuses".
> Ambiguous code like that poses a real danger to the maintainability of
> the codebase and opens threat vectors.
I use it as a string memcpy, where it doesn't copy more than source. But I
don't care about the padding. So option 2 is fine with me.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists