[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250516-erden-demagogen-2f5b823aa8e3@brauner>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 15:29:24 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Daan De Meyer <daan.j.demeyer@...il.com>,
David Rheinsberg <david@...dahead.eu>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Lennart Poettering <lennart@...ttering.net>, Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>, Mike Yuan <me@...dnzj.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@...waw.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@...alicyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/9] coredump: validate socket name as it is written
> > The third strscpy() argument is semantically supposed to be the
> > destination buffer size, not the amount of data to copy. For trivial
> > invocations like here, strscpy() actually allows you to leave out the
> > third argument.
>
> Eeeeewww, that's really implicit behavior. I can use the destination
Ah, I see the argument is optional. I thought you could pass 0 or
something weird.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists