----- "Daniel Veillard" <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 04:12:39PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > > + if ((size_t)st.st_size != st.st_size) { > > shouldn't we chaeck against SECRET_MAX_XML_FILE instead ? No, this code reads the secret value, not the XML, and there's little reason to impose an arbitrary limit on the size. SECRET_MAX_XML_FILE is a left-over from an earlier version, the attached updated patch removes the definition. Mirek
Attachment:
0001-Secret-manipulation-step-7-Local-driver.patch
Description: application/mbox
-- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list