James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > >> I strongly suggest that this is not what is wanted. >> strcmp(x,y) >> and >> strncmp(x,y,sizeof(y)) >> >> are functionally equivalent and strcmp has a bad reputation in >> the security community because it is associated with potential >> buffer overrun issues. >> > > Do you see potential for a buffer overrun in this case? > No, but I hate arguing with people who think that every time they see strcmp that they have found a security flaw. The existing code does exactly what it is intended to. Why make a change that just clutters things up? > The strings being compared are "sysfs" and the name field of 'struct > file_system_type'. The kernel code elsewhere assumes the latter string to > be a valid zero-terminated string, and we should, too. > > > - James > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
