| 1 |
Tavis Ormandy wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>--On Monday, June 20, 2005 07:34:11 +0300 Rumen Yotov <rumen_yotov@×××.bg> |
| 4 |
>wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
>>Hi, |
| 9 |
>>Recently began using flawfinder& rats and they're working (logging |
| 10 |
>>things). For now don't have time to look at the logs (beside *me* needing |
| 11 |
>>more time to check them), so is there some place/person which |
| 12 |
>>collects/is_interested in such info. Maybe some meta-bug or other, or |
| 13 |
>>just send they upstream (if correct)? |
| 14 |
>>Any experiences with them, are they correct? |
| 15 |
>>Thanks. Rumen. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
>No, they're very little practical use. If you're stuck and need an "entry |
| 20 |
>point" to start auditing from, they may give you a list of places to start |
| 21 |
>looking, but this is effectively no better than `grep strcat *.c`. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
Hi, |
| 26 |
Thanks for your answers. Won't file a meta-bug till find some real |
| 27 |
cases/problems. |
| 28 |
PS: from the logs it seems not all things are fixed (haven't checked |
| 29 |
though). |
| 30 |
Rumen |
Archives