> Welllllllll..... had you looked at the second hit (really near the top, > so boredom should not have set in yet) searching for why it <was> a hit > you would have seen several instances of str*** func calls being > replaced by strn*** func when the str ones were unsafe. Seeing that it > was all about a CERT vulnerability report one would have assumed that a > student of the topic would have gotten some insight into why these > changes were made.
Well too bad you are wrong Rod, but then you had to go insult him as well, didn't you. > The head tells you that buffer overflows were an issue as they often > are when str funcs are used unsafely. Not in this case. He found a real mistake. What exactly was your contribution to this? OH right. You were insulting with any cause. > I'm sure that a good STFA would have found some insights from Theo and > others and you really should have donee your homework there before > asking about such a frequent topic. Mailing list netiquette. PEOPLE LIKE YOU, jumping on people who actually find real bugs, are the REAL problem with our mailing lists. He found a real bug. You just yelled and yelled and are an ass for it.
