On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 11:56 PM Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Joel Fernandes <j...@joelfernandes.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 04:51:54PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> + workspace = kmalloc(unzipped_len + record->ecc_notice_size, > > > > Should tihs be unzipped_len + record->ecc_notice_size + 1. The extra byte > > being for the NULL character of the ecc notice? > > > > This occurred to me when I saw the + 1 in ram.c. It could be better to just > > abstract the size as a macro. > > Ooh, yes, good catch. I'll get this fixed.
I spent more time looking at this, and it seems that only the initial creation of this string needs the +1, since all other operations are byte-based not NUL-terminated string based. It's a big odd, and I might try to clean it up differently, but as it stands, this is okay. (See inode.c which doesn't include the trailing NUL byte.) -Kees -- Kees Cook
