SC-L
I'm not quite so sure why this one (below) caught my eye -- we _all_
get tons of product advisories -- but it did. In particular, two
things jump out at me:
1) the original author of the defect thought that s/he was doing
things correctly in using strncpy (vs. strcpy).
2) the
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Kenneth Van Wyk wrote:
Mind you, the overrun can only be exploited when specific characters
are used as input to the loop in the code. Thus, I'm inclined to
think that this is an interesting example of a bug that would have
been extraordinarily difficult to find using
On 6/26/07 4:25 PM, Wall, Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I mean, was the fix really rocket science that it had to take THAT LONG???
IMHO, no excuse for taking that long.
8 months seems awfully long, but it doesn't surprise me that a big organization
takes a really long time to get things like
Hey all,
1) the original author of the defect thought that s/he was
doing things correctly in using strncpy (vs. strcpy).
2) the original author had apparently been doing static
source analysis using David Wheeler's Flawfinder tool, as we
can tell from the comments.
This is humorous,
On 6/26/07 4:25 PM, Wall, Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I mean, was the fix really rocket science that it had to take THAT
LONG??? IMHO, no excuse for taking that long.
Some major vendor organizations, most notably Oracle and Microsoft, have
frequently stated that they can't always fix even
