Editing Glibc (section)

=== Secure string functions ===
glibc does not implement bounds-checking interfaces defined in [[C11 (C standard revision)|C11]] and did not implement strlcpy and strlcat<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kerrisk |first=Michael |title=The ups and downs of strlcpy() |url=https://lwn.net/Articles/507319/ |access-date=2023-12-09 |website=[[LWN.net]] |archive-date=9 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231209152233/https://lwn.net/Articles/507319/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Corbet |first=Jonathan |title=Adding strlcpy() to glibc |url=https://lwn.net/Articles/612244/ |access-date=2023-12-09 |website=[[LWN.net]] |archive-date=9 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231209152233/https://lwn.net/Articles/612244/ |url-status=live }}</ref> until 2023 on the grounds that "in practice these functions can cause trouble, as their intended use encourages silent data truncation, adds complexity and inefficiency, and does not prevent all buffer overruns in the destinations."<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=FAQ |url=https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/FAQ#Why_no_strlcpy_.2F_strlcat.3F |access-date=2023-12-09 |website=sourceware.org |archive-date=9 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231209151431/https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/FAQ#Why_no_strlcpy_.2F_strlcat.3F |url-status=live }}</ref> The FAQ pointed out that the bounds-checking interfaces were optional in the ISO standard and that snprintf was available as an alternative.<ref name=":2" />