I've asked around internally and the overwhelming
consensus is that memcpy is not dangerous in
the overlapping case. Our security/vulnerability
expert does not see a problem - as long the
pointers are valid of course.
The long-ago author of the memcpy man page
surely meant that the end resulting b
+1
-phil.
On 05/26/2015 03:24 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Thanks for clarification!
The fix looks fine.
On 26.05.15 9:12, prasanta sadhukhan wrote:
Hi Sergey,
Yes, the original bugs can still be reproduced with jdk1.6 with
updated test.
Regards
Prasanta
On 5/25/2015 9:19 PM, Sergey Bylokho
On 28/05/15 21:33, Jim Graham wrote:
> The only viable reason for switching to memmove is to either silence the
> tool that reported the issue or to fix the data ordering issue.
Or to remove the UB. Your opinion that UB is constrained is wrong in
principle and dangerous in practice. It is extr
