Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932943AbbD1DtG (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2015 23:49:06 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:40648 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752859AbbD1DtD (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2015 23:49:03 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 04:48:59 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Fabian Frederick , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: revert "fs/befs/linuxvfs.c: replace strncpy by strlcpy" Message-ID: <20150428034859.GI889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1824 Lines: 37 commit 39d7a29f867bd5a4a551fad6bb3812ceddb0bce1 Author: Fabian Frederick Date: Fri Jun 6 14:36:15 2014 -0700 fs/befs/linuxvfs.c: replace strncpy by strlcpy strncpy + end of string assignment replaced by strlcpy replaces perfectly safe code with undefined behaviour. All in the name of "security hardening", presumably. Folks, seeing the words "designed to be safer, more consistent, and less error prone replacement" in a manpage does *NOT* mean "OK, quit reading it - no need to go further, not even to the end of the paragraph". Because in the end of that paragraph it says "This means that for strlcpy() src must be NUL-terminated". And sure enough, our implementation relies on that - it starts with strlen(). strncpy() is guaranteed not to look further than size. strlcpy() is *NOT*. strncpy() on unvalidated source is safe, provided that you sanitize the copy; strlcpy() on anything like that is an invitation for nasal daemons. Sure, we can (and probably should) make strlcpy(dst, src, n) never access memory beyond src + n - 1, but this kind of cargo-culting is a Bad Thing(tm); mindless "security improvements" without so much as bothering to RTFM are asking for trouble. And in userland code anything like that _can't_ be papered over afterwards - not unless you can patch every libc implementation out there. This particular code is completely pointless - if anything, it should've been memcpy() + nd_terminate_link()... Al, very unhappy about the prospect of looking through ~2000 calls of strlcpy() we have in the tree... -- 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/