Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 6 Nov 2001 18:39:01 -0500 (EST) | From | Ricky Beam <> | Subject | Re: PROPOSAL: dot-proc interface [was: /proc stuff] |
| |
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 dank@trellisinc.com wrote: >"code poet?" you've plucked an 80 from the air. regardless of what the >kernel prints now and how it's limited (deep within drivers/block/genhd.c), >there is no reference to this silent 63 via either explicit comment or >pure code. your code remains happily ignorant of any modification to this >postcondition, and when that changes (as it surely will), you lose. it's >uninspired coding like the above that keeps the buffer overflow >technique alive.
Exactly. Just because the code _currently_ won't generate more than 63 chars doesn't mean it always will. And who says the application will see the true, kernel generated "/proc/partitions"? <raises eyebrow>
>c string processing is all of doable, mature, and meticulous. "done >properly by beginners" is not how i would describe it.
Experience shows beginners rarely get thing right the first time out. (Or the second or third time if they are like some of my previous students.)
--Ricky
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |