[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: getnameinfo extra len checking
In article <20100621140636.GC737319%qnx.com@localhost>,
Sean Boudreau <seanb%qnx.com@localhost> wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 07:35:09PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 5:25pm, tls%panix.com@localhost (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: getnameinfo extra len checking
>> | On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 09:02:16PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> | >
>> | > What is sa_len in that case? I think it is 0. If so, then we can
>> | > 0 through.
>> | What's setting 0? Not setting sa_len is bogus.
>> Right, linux code that does not set sa_len...
>So I'm leaning towards removing this check enirely. Would
>that be acceptable?
I think so. The kernel does not pay attention to sa_len either in syscalls
that take an extra salen argument (sys_bind() for example).
Main Index |
Thread Index |