Re: Algol For Linux

In article <wwvo6tnp4z6.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>,
Richard Kettlewell  <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro  <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Ben Collver wrote:

Memory Safety Since 1958

>
Kidding, right?

>
He's probably kidding but he's got a point.
>
The number one security problem with Linux is null-terminated strings.

>
I’m not convinced. I skimmed the CVEs listed in [1] and only one of them
had a clear relationship to 0-terminated strings, and even that is a
false positive from Fortify.
>
[1] https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-33/product_id-47/year-2025/Linux-Linux-Kernel.html
>
0-terminated strings are certainly a bad design (for multiple reasons)
but there’s a lot of other well-known security pitfalls in the C
language.

I believe Scott was attempting to riff on the overall joke.

- Dan C.