Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Python 2.5 (Modules/zlib) minigzip local buffer overflow vulnerability
From: Alejandro Barrera <abarrera () iron-gate net>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 02:01:29 +0100
Thus, replacing strcpy(3) calls with strncpy(3) can have definite impacts on performance.But the question is how big impact? Its a security/speed trade-off.
That depends on your actual code. It's not a security/speed trade-off, it's a _I_don't_fucking_care_about_anything_and_I_use_the_easiest_function/speed trade-off. If you care about security AND speed then you use strcpy() correctly, if you're a lazy bastard and don't care about speed, then use strncpy(). Anyway, usually you should fill the whole buffer, so if you know how to code, it shouldn't have a big impact. *BUT* if you're one of those lazy guys that just allocate a 1024 char buffer to copy 32 char strings then you have worse problems than security.
Regards.
-- Alejandro Barrera García-Orea R&D Engineer c/ Alcala 268 28027 Madrid Office: +34 91 326 66 11 Fax: +34 91 326 66 11 e-mail: abarrera () iron-gate net _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Python 2.5 (Modules/zlib) minigzip local buffer overflow vulnerability Ulf Harnhammar (Mar 15)
- Re: Python 2.5 (Modules/zlib) minigzip local buffer overflow vulnerability Ismail Dönmez (Mar 15)
- Re: Python 2.5 (Modules/zlib) minigzip local buffer overflow vulnerability Alejandro Barrera (Mar 15)
- Re: Python 2.5 (Modules/zlib) minigzip local buffer overflow vulnerability Ismail Dönmez (Mar 15)
