Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:One question remains, though: + // buf_size = min(count, buf_size); + if (buf_size count) buf_size = count;Is there any reason not to write mim() here?It's a bit faster than buf_size = min(), since there's no need to reassign "buf_size" again, if it's less
Anon Sricharoenchai wrote:
Package: mimms
Version: 0.0.9-1
Severity: grave
Justification: user security hole
Tags: security patch
According to the patch attached in this report, it has many possible buffer
overflows.
For example,
- memcpy(buf, data, length) without bounding the limit of
Package: mimms
Version: 0.0.9-1
Severity: grave
Justification: user security hole
Tags: security patch
According to the patch attached in this report, it has many possible buffer
overflows.
For example,
- memcpy(buf, data, length) without bounding the limit of length,
while length depend on the
3 matches
Mail list logo
