Hi,
I was wondering how to use strcpy safely so that I can get reported when overwriting happens?
Or other methods that achieve the same function with security check?
Also in C++, is there a C++ way to handle it besides using STL string class?
Hi,
I was wondering how to use strcpy safely so that I can get reported when overwriting happens?
Or other methods that achieve the same function with security check?
Also in C++, is there a C++ way to handle it besides using STL string class?
If you are not using a smart container like std::string, then the only way to be safe is to ensure that there is enough space before you do the copy. This means using strncpy(), or erroring out if the buffer is too small.
Moved to C++
If you have established that you have enough room, why should you use strncpy?
In C++, you can also use a std::vector<char> to take care of dynamic memory management for an otherwise C-style string (and knowing at any time how much memory you have for the buffer).
Unless you know how much memory is allocated for the target, there is no way. std::vector<char> helps in storing the size of the buffer for you.How to detect if the buffer is too small for strcpy()?
I might be wrong.
Quoted more than 1000 times (I hope).Thank you, anon. You sure know how to recognize different types of trees from quite a long way away.
Usually this is pretty easy:How to detect if the buffer is too small for strcpy()?
Code:void do_copy(char* str) { char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE]; size_t size = strlen(str); if(size >= BUFFER_SIZE) { /* Error, buffer is too small */ } else { strcpy(buffer, str); } // ... }
If you're in C++, use std::string, as others have mentioned. If you absolutely must use strcpy(), just don't pass it a buffer that can't hold what you're going to copy into it. And don't forget about strdup(). Otherwise, it's generally:
Code:// Determine how much space I need. // Allocate a buffer of that size + room for null terminator // Check for buffer allocation errors // Do the copy.
long time; /* know C? */
Unprecedented performance: Nothing ever ran this slow before.
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
Real Programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas, because dec 25 == oct 31.
The best way to accelerate an IBM is at 9.8 m/s/s.
recursion (re - cur' - zhun) n. 1. (see recursion)
My homepage
Advice: Take only as directed - If symptoms persist, please see your debugger
Linus Torvalds: "But it clearly is the only right way. The fact that everybody else does it some other way only means that they are wrong"
...or at least strncpy...
Code:#include <cmath> #include <complex> bool euler_flip(bool value) { return std::pow ( std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), std::complex<float>(0, 1) * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0) *(1 << (value + 2))) ).real() < 0; }
Why exactly is strncpy such a safety feature? OK, it allows you to copy stuff without finding out the length of the source string at first, but then you run the risk that not the entire string is copied and it can be left unterminated if you are not careful. Eventually you'll need to put a lot of work into it to get the same result as with strcpy if your intention is to copy the whole string. It would seem that strncpy has a somewhat different purpose (something like substr )? (I've never felt any need to use strncpy, because if the string manipulation gets this complicated, I'd definitely use std::string)
I might be wrong.
Quoted more than 1000 times (I hope).Thank you, anon. You sure know how to recognize different types of trees from quite a long way away.
You are not being paranoid enough: assume that the contents of the source string cannot be trusted, i.e., it might not be null terminated. strcpy() would then be unable to avoid buffer overrun, whereas strncpy() can.Originally Posted by anon
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
Of course that only saves you from overrunning the destination buffer. If the source cannot be trusted (ie not null terminated), then there's still a good chance you will overrun the source buffer.You are not being paranoid enough: assume that the contents of the source string cannot be trusted, i.e., it might not be null terminated. strcpy() would then be unable to avoid buffer overrun, whereas strncpy() can.
That is why I stated "contents of the source", since it may be a reasonable assumption that the size of the source buffer is known and trusted even when the contents of the source are entirely untrusted.Originally Posted by bithub
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)