Re: [patch 1/2] staging/bcm: two information leaks in ioctl

2014-02-17 Thread Dave Jones
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:13:16PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:59:19PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:56:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > There are a couple paths where we don't check how much data we copy back > > > to the user. >

Re: [patch 1/2] staging/bcm: two information leaks in ioctl

2014-02-17 Thread Dan Carpenter
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:59:19PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:56:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > There are a couple paths where we don't check how much data we copy back > > to the user. > > I'm curious, is this something smatch is only picking up now that > I cho

Re: [patch 1/2] staging/bcm: two information leaks in ioctl

2014-02-17 Thread Dave Jones
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:56:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > There are a couple paths where we don't check how much data we copy back > to the user. I'm curious, is this something smatch is only picking up now that I chopped up that mega function into lots of little functions ? Dave

[patch 1/2] staging/bcm: two information leaks in ioctl

2014-02-17 Thread Dan Carpenter
There are a couple paths where we don't check how much data we copy back to the user. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter diff --git a/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmchar.c b/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmchar.c index fdebc3bba0b5..6f1997dc44c8 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmchar.c +++ b/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmc