Possible bufferoverflow condition in lpr, xterm and xload

[bloodmask () mymail com (bloodmask)]

Greetings,

Quite surprised by mount's lack of boundry checking (After all, it's
been with linux for years) I woke up and started running a simple check
up on all the other suid binaries on popular Linux distributions.
Anyway, Linux users, be very very afraid, it seems mount isn't alone.
Not by a long shot. It seems other binaries on linux and probably on
most unix platforms fail to preform this type of simple checkup on the
size of command line argument / enviorment variables as in relation to
internal buffer size. The check i ran was simple, I coded a command line
buffer overflow scanner, which simply attempted to overwrite the stack
of all the suid binaries on my system. Suspicious and probably
exploitable behavior was a segment of the binary apon execution, with
scanner's command line supplied. My midterm results:

suspicious behavior in lpr [hoho, this is a quite common suid root
binary, in many commercail and non-commercail versions of unix], lpr
exhibited the same behavior as mount, by segmenting when supplied with
an argument above 1024 bytes.

xterm, xload, both segmented when supplied with -display commandline
argument / enviroment variable above it's buffer size. Probably
exploitable, although i haven't gotten around to veryfing this myself,
I'd like to here comments concerning this suspicioun of mine.

Err... love to here any comments...

C'ya folks