netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] wifi: ipw2200: use strscpy() to instead of strncpy()

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

Message-ID: <6fb9fc37203bab5082603caf4b4fbecdd3241541.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:23:25 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     yang.yang29@....com.cn, stas.yakovlev@...il.com
Cc:     kvalo@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        xu.panda@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] wifi: ipw2200: use strscpy() to instead of
 strncpy()

On Fri, 2022-12-23 at 10:56 +0800, yang.yang29@....com.cn wrote:
> From: Xu Panda <xu.panda@....com.cn>
> 
> The implementation of strscpy() is more robust and safer.
> That's now the recommended way to copy NUL-terminated strings.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xu Panda <xu.panda@....com.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Yang <yang.yang29@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/intel/ipw2x00/ipw2200.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/ipw2x00/ipw2200.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/ipw2x00/ipw2200.c
> index ca802af8cddc..6656cea496b1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/ipw2x00/ipw2200.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/ipw2x00/ipw2200.c
> @@ -1483,8 +1483,7 @@ static ssize_t scan_age_store(struct device *d, struct device_attribute *attr,
> 
>  	IPW_DEBUG_INFO("enter\n");
> 
> -	strncpy(buffer, buf, len);
> -	buffer[len] = 0;
> +	strncpy(buffer, buf, len + 1);
> 

Ummm?

But anyway - why bother ... ancient drivers, clearly OK code.

johannes