[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <260dab9c3fe84b3fb648474b0155b131@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:11:00 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Static analysis of John using CppCheck
On 21 Jan, 2013, at 8:06 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 21 Jan, 2013, at 5:41 , Lukas Odzioba <lukas.odzioba@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi I used Cppcheck 1.55 (but newest is 1.58) to check unstable-jumbo.
>> Here is link to results: http://ideone.com/BO7XVd - over 600 lines so
>> I didn't want to post it here.
>>
> I checked most of the claimed "Buffer access out-of-bounds" and they are just false positives. Example:
>
> memcpy(block, AFS_long_IV, 8);
>
> Size of both are 8 so this is not out of bounds. But block is ARCH_WORD_32 so it seems Cppcheck tries to apply pointer arithmetic where it shouldn't. Same red herring in all cases I checked.
From 1.57 changelog: "Fixed several false negatives in buffer overrun check". Perhaps latest would be better.
magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
