On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 09:04:43PM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
After 3d41e4d83895 ("passt-repair: Correct
off-by-one error verifying
name"), Coverity Scan isn't convinced anymore about the fact that the
ev->name used in the snprintf() is NULL-terminated.
Aww, man :(
It comes from a read() call, and read() of course
doesn't terminate
it, but we already check that the byte at ev->len - 1 is a NULL
terminator, so this is actually a false positive.
Indeed. I'm kind of baffled that it's able to reason it out with the
off-by-one, but not without.
In any case, the logic ensuring that ev->name is
NULL-terminated isn't
necessarily obvious, and additionally checking that the last byte in
the buffer we read is a NULL terminator is harmless, so do that
explicitly, even if it's redundant.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>
Vexing that it's necessary, but
Reviewed-by: David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au>
---
passt-repair.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/passt-repair.c b/passt-repair.c
index 440c77a..256a8c9 100644
--- a/passt-repair.c
+++ b/passt-repair.c
@@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
fprintf(stderr, "inotify read: %i", errno);
_exit(1);
}
+ buf[n - 1] = '\0';
if (n < (ssize_t)sizeof(*ev)) {
fprintf(stderr, "Short inotify read: %zi", n);
--
David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way
| around.
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson