Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:29:10 -0400 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: gerarra@tin.it Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Kernel buffer overflow Message-ID: <20040917052910.GA858@VARK.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <4146316C00007833@ims3a.cp.tin.it> References: <4146316C00007833@ims3a.cp.tin.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004, gerarra@tin.it wrote: > > > > >If we put your patch in but as a KASSERT then anyone ruinning with > >debugging turned on > >(and no-one in their right mind would write a kernel module without > >turning on debugging, right?) > >will immediatly find the problem. > > > > What you can't understand is that having a limit about arguments is wrong > (it's not documented too). Why limiting to 8 and not to 20? or 65? i don't > understand... > In my opinion a patch would be better (and even quicker respect KASSERT). Hey, until recently, Linux on i386 required a special case for any syscall with over 4 arguments. Supporting 8 makes us twice as good! ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040917052910.GA858>