linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Replace strcpy() with strscpy() in vpe

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: <aA3jI7dlNJZ1pTsG@alpha.franken.de>
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2025 09:56:19 +0200
From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Replace strcpy() with strscpy() in vpe_elfload()

On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 09:46:48AM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> strcpy() is deprecated; use strscpy() instead.
> 
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88
> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
> ---
>  arch/mips/kernel/vpe.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/vpe.c b/arch/mips/kernel/vpe.c
> index 737d0d4fdcd3..2b67c44adab9 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/vpe.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/vpe.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>  #include <linux/vmalloc.h>
>  #include <linux/elf.h>
>  #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> +#include <linux/string.h>
>  #include <linux/syscalls.h>
>  #include <linux/moduleloader.h>
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> @@ -582,7 +583,7 @@ static int vpe_elfload(struct vpe *v)
>  	struct module mod; /* so we can re-use the relocations code */
>  
>  	memset(&mod, 0, sizeof(struct module));
> -	strcpy(mod.name, "VPE loader");
> +	strscpy(mod.name, "VPE loader");
>  
>  	hdr = (Elf_Ehdr *) v->pbuffer;
>  	len = v->plen;
> -- 
> 2.49.0

applied to mips-next.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]