FreeBSD Kernel buffer overflow

[viro at parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk]

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 07:52:18PM -0700, Avleen Vig wrote:
> The difference is, that calling panic(9) is not a bug, it's a designed
> mechanism to panic a kernel.
> The behaviour reported is NOT designed behaviour (at least, no-one has
> said it is).
> 
> Therefore, if the man wants to write a patch to fix unintended
> behaviour, what's wrong with that?

Extra code on a time-critical path with no sane use whatsoever.  Note
that anyone who adds a syscall (or a library function, for that matter)
with that many arguments deserves public humiliation for terminal lack
of taste, so it's not going to help anything that wouldn't be worth
rm -rf...