On Thursday 05 October 2017 01:41:02 ros...@gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 09:48 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 19:22:11 Rosen Penev wrote: > > > diff --git a/src/cache.c b/src/cache.c > > > index 4f43246..88851e7 100644 > > > --- a/src/cache.c > > > +++ b/src/cache.c > > > @@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ struct crec *cache_insert(char *name, struct > > > all_addr *addr, > > > } > > > > > > if (name) > > > - strcpy(cache_get_name(new), name); > > > + strncpy(cache_get_name(new), name, > > > strlen(cache_get_name(new))); > > > > Hi! This line looks suspicious. Should not be length argument sizeof > > of > > destination buffer, instead of current length of null term string? > > > > Doesn't sizeof on a pointer return the size of the pointer instead of > the string?
Yes! Therefore I wrote word construction "size of destination buffer" and not code "sizeof(buf)". You need to take size of that destination buffer manually. > > Also strncpy in some circumstances fill string which is not null > > terminated. > > strlen apparently does not include \0. needs a + 1 looks like. That is another problem. But still my above sentence about strncpy applies. strncpy does not ensure that destination string would be always null terminated, even source one was. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasqemail@example.com http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss