On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 14:25:02 -0800 Kees Cook wrote:
> I think for getname() (and similar interfaces) we *do* want to use
> sockaddr_storage, but there is kind of an argument to instead use
> a struct with a flexible array, e.g.:
>
> struct sockaddr_unspec {
> sa_family_t sa_family;
> char sa_data[];
> };
>
> If this was done, then all these APIs would switch their casts from
> "(struct sockaddr *)" to "(struct sockaddr_unspec *)", even though in
> most cases the object is actully a struct sockaddr_storage.
struct sockaddr_unspec was my knee-jerk reaction but looking at the code
- indeed passing struct sockaddr_storage seems cleaner.
> What do folks think?
Looks nice, and feels like the right direction :)
FWIW if the conversion work is too tedious I think I can find some
people that could help.
