Subject: Re: sprintf -> snprintf
To: Peter Seebach <>
From: Michael Graff <>
List: current-users
Date: 09/30/1996 13:37:26
Peter Seebach <> writes:

> I'm mildly opposed to introducing a dependancy on a non-standard feature,
> but on the other hand, snprintf may well be in C9X, so... :)

In the name of security, I'm not.

But I do think we should initially limit the changes to the setuid
programs and get the rest later.