Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-123702-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:06:03 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>
Cc: reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reiserfs: replace deprecated strncpy with scnprintf
Message-ID: <202403281505.C5C8691@keescook>
References: <20240328-strncpy-fs-reiserfs-item_ops-c-v1-1-2dab6d22a996@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240328-strncpy-fs-reiserfs-item_ops-c-v1-1-2dab6d22a996@google.com>

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 09:16:52PM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> strncpy() is deprecated for use on NUL-terminated destination strings
> [1] and as such we should prefer more robust and less ambiguous string
> interfaces.
> 
> Our goal here is to get @namebuf populated with @name's contents but
> surrounded with quotes. There is some careful handling done to ensure we
> properly truncate @name so that we have room for a literal quote as well
> as a NUL-term. All this careful handling can be done with scnprintf
> using the dynamic string width specifier %.*s which allows us to pass in
> the max size for a source string. Doing this, we can put literal quotes
> in our format specifier and ensure @name is truncated to fit inbetween
> these quotes (-3 is from 2 quotes + 1 NUL-byte).
> 
> All in all, we get to remove a deprecated use of strncpy and clean up
> this code nicely!
> 
> Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#strncpy-on-nul-terminated-strings [1]
> Link: https://manpages.debian.org/testing/linux-manual-4.8/strscpy.9.en.html [2]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/90
> Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>

Yeah, I like the use of %.*s here. This is much more clear now I think.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook