linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/orangefs: use snprintf() instead of sprintf()

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CADf5TKvorgeCJ=6u6=jhxetUhDx3SCnUBe+cpbUQu5gADqRRCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2025 23:39:44 +0330
From: Amir Mohammad Jahangirzad <a.jahangirzad@...il.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: hubcap@...ibond.com, martin@...ibond.com, devel@...ts.orangefs.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/orangefs: use snprintf() instead of sprintf()

On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 10:18 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 10:09:58PM +0330, Amir Mohammad Jahangirzad wrote:
>
> > > Replace sprintf() with snprintf() for copying the debug string
> > > into a temporary buffer, using ORANGEFS_MAX_DEBUG_STRING_LEN as
> > > the maximum size to ensure safe formatting and prevent memory
> > > corruption in edge cases.
>
> Out of curiosity - have you actually looked at the format used there?

No, I just found this through static analysis. Is there any issue with it?