Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!gatech!ncar!mailrus!eecae!cps3xx!usenet
From: usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: retiring gets(3)
Message-ID: <1031@cps3xx.UUCP>
Date: 9 Nov 88 12:37:41 GMT
References: <1988Nov8.054845.23998@utstat.uucp>
Organization: Engineering, Michigan State U., E. Lansing MI
Lines: 12

in article <1988Nov8.054845.23998@utstat.uucp>, geoff@utstat.uucp (Geoff Collyer) says:
$ 
$ The recent exposure of the security bug in the 4BSD fingerd caused by
$ use of gets(3) reminded me that gets is a bug waiting to happen and
$ should be stamped out. 

This may be a naive question, or perhaps I haven't followed the right
stories, but what is the problem with using gets versus fgets?

John H. Lawitzke      UUCP: ...rutgers!mailrus!frith!fciiho!jhl
Michigan Farm Bureau        ...decvax!purdue!mailrus!frith!fciiho!jhl
Insurance Group             ...uunet!frith!jhl