Re: linux type definitions

[Timo Sirainen <tss () iki fi>]

On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 07:12:32AM -0000, n d wrote:
> i was wondering why pid_t and size_t are defined as signed integers? im
> not too sure that a process id can be negative. and if strlen returns a
> 16-bit signed integer what would happen if strlen was passed a string with
> a size of 34000?

I don't think pid_t is required to be signed, but a lot of code assumes it
when they compare fork() return value against -1 without casting.

size_t is defined to be unsigned in C99 standard. Some implementations have
defined it as signed, but I'd consider those to be broken. strlen() can't
return a value out of range of size_t, or the implementation is broken
(size_t should have been defined larger).

If you're looking for security holes related to strlen(), I doubt you can
find any real ones. size_t is always defined large enough that your process
runs out of memory before you can overflow it, unless you're still running
some system with segmented memory access (embedded maybe?)

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html