On 12/06/2013 02:07 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
On 12/05/2013 08:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
The vast majority of those warnings are actually false positives, not actual
security issues. Putting my upstream hat on, if asked to "fix" such a false
positive, I'd do one of:
(a) close the bug as INVALID/NOTABUG/WONTFIX or
(b) hardcode -Wno-error=format-security -Wno-format-security in my build
setup and close the bug as FIXED.
They are potential security issues, because ignoring them (especially
via (b)) sets everyone up for a fail.
In case these errors are bogus?
For instance, today it may be a constant format string, but tomorrow
someone will introduce it as a settable configuration parameter.
>
Given that pretty much all those cases can be solved by either "%s" or
== Forcing C-coders to using a special coding style to silence a broken
tools warning on what is legitimate and correct code?
printf(string) is legitimate C, forcing "printf("%s", string) is just silly.
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
