Difference between revisions of "Talk:Secure programming"
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
# not be detected by a range checking during runtime?<br> | # not be detected by a range checking during runtime?<br> | ||
--[[User:Ruza|Ruza]] 06:19, 26 Feb 2005 (CET) | --[[User:Ruza|Ruza]] 06:19, 26 Feb 2005 (CET) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Ruza, the "Secure programming" page is about how to write a good code vs bad code that can cuse to a security risks in your networks, computer or to a data. | ||
+ | Memory leak is not a security risk (unless in some way the data in an unclean data does expose to someone). It's only a bug... | ||
+ | I will keep your section and rephrase your writing in the weekend so it will be better :) | ||
+ | But please keep on contributing to this section :) | ||
+ | Thanks, | ||
+ | |||
+ | --[[User:ik_5|ik_5]] |
Revision as of 22:20, 1 March 2005
var sName : String[10]; .... sName := 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz' ; ....
won't create any trouble. The compiler knows how long strings are when storing data. --FPK 23:32, 25 Feb 2005 (CET)
As I said, it's just a static example that even the compiler will find out... But first we need to understand what is a buffer overflow in order to know how to make a better workaround :) --ik_5
Is there some code that would
- illustrate buffer overflow problem
- not be detected by a range checking during runtime?
--Ruza 06:19, 26 Feb 2005 (CET)
Ruza, the "Secure programming" page is about how to write a good code vs bad code that can cuse to a security risks in your networks, computer or to a data. Memory leak is not a security risk (unless in some way the data in an unclean data does expose to someone). It's only a bug... I will keep your section and rephrase your writing in the weekend so it will be better :) But please keep on contributing to this section :) Thanks,
--ik_5