Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:13:57 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Added some defensive code to net/socket functions Message-ID: <20011124221357.D14975@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <20011124031835 DOT GA22045 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011124031835.GA22045@redhat.com>; from cgf@redhat.com on Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 10:18:35PM -0500 On Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 10:18:35PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > As I was in the process of adding the fd protection code that was just > mentioned in the cygwin mailing list, I decided to add the normal buffer > checking defensive code to most of the net/socket functions. I've > verified that sshd, inetd, and telnetd still work, but I'd appreciate it > if I could get some assurance that I haven't broken anything else. > > The checking in net.cc was a lot trickier than I had anticipated so > I could easily have gotten something wrong. > > If someone could verify my changes, it would be great. They look ok except for one in cygwin_inet_network() which I've just changed. I have added the missing checks except for cygwin_rcmd() and cygwin_rexec(). They both have a so weird usage of the pointered parameters. Hmm, I could add stuff at least partly. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.