From: | Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@×××××.com> | ||
---|---|---|---|
To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] memset_s | ||
Date: | Fri, 10 Nov 2017 11:34:56 | ||
Message-Id: | CAKpSnpJ-FrOBttWNbOqiDxNLnQ5kTsHAbTNgZvRUSgL4hUxb=w@mail.gmail.com | ||
In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] memset_s by Marc Joliet |
1 | On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Marc Joliet <marcec@×××.de> wrote: |
2 | > Am Freitag, 10. November 2017, 10:54:53 CET schrieb Jorge Almeida: |
3 | >> I'm trying to use memset_s() but the system (glibc?) doesn't know |
4 | >> about it. I also tried to compile against musl, same result. |
5 | >> |
6 | |
7 | |
8 | > It seems as though it is simply not implemented, I found a variety of links |
9 | > that all support this: |
10 | > |
11 | > https://stackoverflow.com/a/40162721 |
12 | > |
13 | > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38322363/when-will-the-safe-string-functions-of-c11-be-part-of-glibc |
14 | > |
15 | > https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status (which states that Annex K is not |
16 | > implemented) |
17 | > |
18 | > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1967.htm |
19 | > |
20 | OK, thanks. The last link even suggests that Annex K should be |
21 | deprecated. I suppose this people don't care about security at all. |
22 | |
23 | Of course, what would really solve the optimize-into-oblivion problem |
24 | is a pragma that when invoked on a particular block of code (maybe |
25 | only a function definition) would tell the compiler to do what the |
26 | programmer says rather than viewing a function as a kind of black box. |
27 | |
28 | Jorge Almeida |
Subject | Author |
---|---|
Re: [gentoo-user] memset_s | R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> |