Re: strncpy is not a safe version of strcpy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: strncpy is not a safe version of strcpy
Date
Msg-id 1384525968.71775.YahooMailNeo@web162905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: strncpy is not a safe version of strcpy  ("Tomas Vondra" <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz> wrote:
> On 15 Listopad 2013, 1:00, David Rowley wrote:
>> more focused on trying to draw a bit of attention to commit
>> 061b88c732952c59741374806e1e41c1ec845d50 which uses strncpy and
>> does not properly set the last byte to 0 afterwards. I think
>> this case could just be replaced with strlcpy which does all
>> this hard work for us.
>
> Hmm, you mean this piece of code?
>
>   strncpy(saved_argv0, argv[0], MAXPGPATH);
>
> IMHO you're right that's probably broken, unless there's some
> checking happening before the call.


I agree, and there is no such checking.  Fix pushed.

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Race condition in b-tree page deletion
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Logging WAL when updating hintbit