Microsoft 的一些安全功能是 C++11 的一部分，因此它们现在应该是可移植的。
安全函数和传统函数之间的一个重要区别是异常行为，有时还有返回值。许多程序员都不注意这两者；这些差异往往被忽视。
例如snprintf的异常行为与_snprintf_s不同：
snprintf 返回打印字符串所需的字符数，而不是
计算终止的空字符，而不管缓冲区的大小。
我不认为 snprintf 本身会引发异常，而是无效的内存访问
会的。
_snprintf_s 如果 buff 足够大，则返回与 snprintf 相同的值，但
如果 buff 太小，或者 buff 或 fmt 是 NULL 指针，_snprintf_s 调用
参数处理程序无效，分别设置 errno = ERANGE 或 EINVAL，
并返回 -1。
如果异常行为在您的旧代码中很重要，请在从旧的传统函数转换为安全版本时注意。
几年来，我一直在努力使用 Microsoft 的安全“_s”功能，尤其是在编写为 Visual Studio 中的 Windows 平台和使用 gcc/g++ 的 'nix 平台编译的代码时。重用旧源代码也很痛苦，因为将 fprintf() 更改为 fprintf_s() 等代码很麻烦。 _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRICAT 宏抑制了弃用警告，但我从来都不喜欢关闭编译器没有解决根本问题的警告；发出警告是有原因的。
我的临时补丁（我承认我仍然不时使用）是一个包含宏的包含文件和一些用于映射传统和安全函数的内联函数。当然，映射不会模仿异常行为和返回值。如果你愿意，你也可以编写函数来模仿它，但在某些时候，使用安全函数并更改旧代码来做同样的事情会更容易。此外，某些安全功能无法轻松映射，例如sprintf 到 sprintf_s。
这是我的包含文件（cmets 多于代码，但值得一读，恕我直言）：
#pragma once
#if !defined(FCN_S_MACROS_H)
#define FCN_S_MACROS_H
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// These macros provide (partial) compatibility of source code developed
// for older MSVC versions and non-MSVC c++ compilers for some of Microsoft's
// security enhanced funcions, e.g. fscanf_s, sscanf_s, printf_s, strcpy_s,
// fopen_s.... Of course the standard functions still work in MSVS, but
// the choice is either to live with the annoying warning messages (bad idea)
// or set a compiler directive to stop the warnings (bad idea--there might
// important warnings as well as the annoying ones).
//
// It looks like a lot of the secure functions are now part of C++11. Those
// functions should be used in new code. The macros below can be used for
// for as a bridge for older code, but at some point it would be best to
// upgrade the code with the more secure functions. Eventually, the depricated
// functions may be removed, but probably not for a long time.
//
// Bill Brinson
// 21 February 2011 (updated once or twice since then).
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Does It Work:
//
// *** No warranty expresed nor implied. Use at your own risk. ***
//
// I've tested most of the standard function to MS specific macros. They
// work in my codes so far, but Murphy says ...
//
// I usually write code in MSVS, using the standard functions, then port to
// linux if needed. I haven't though as much about the inverse macros,
// nor have I tested all of them. They seem unnecessary anyway. Too bad: they
// tend to be simpler.
// Test the macros yourself, and investigate exception behaviors before using
// them.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// String Functions With No Count Parameter:
//
// The string functions that don't specify the maximum number of bytes to copy
// into the buffer (sprintf, strcpy, ...) are a problem. Using the sizeof()
// operator is a terrible idea (I should know--I though of it myself.
// Fortunately sanity prevailed before I used it in real code.
// In case you are tempted: the sizeof(buff) method WILL FAIL at runtime
// if buffer is not defined as an array (char cstring[32] or similar). For
// dynamically allocated memory, sizeof(ptr) returns the size of the pointer
// itself, not the allocated memory, so if your are copying no more than four
// bytes and you allocated at least that many, it would work due to blind luck.
// _memsize() (MS specific, but that's were it's needed) can be used for
// memory allocated with malloc, calloc, or realloc, but it doesn't work
// for char buff[size] or memory allocated with the new opperator. Does anyone
// still use malloc()?
// Overloaded functions taking char[] and *char to differentiate them might
// work for arrays and pointers to memory allocated by malloc et. al., but not
// for pointers to memory allocated by new (which have the same type, so not
// differentiated by the overloaded functions).
// If someone an idea, please let me know.
//
// This should only be an issue for legacy code; use snprintf, strncpy, etc.
// in new code (which you already do, right?), and make sure count has an
// appropriate value. For legacy code containing sprintf, strcpy, etc.,
// I've decided to just bite the bullet: let the MS compiler point out the
// unsafe functions, then change them to the safer (but standard) versions
// that specify the allowable number of bytes to copy.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Exception Behavior:
//
// This is an important difference between the MS decreed safe functions and
// the traditional C/C++ functions.
// I suspect all of the MS specific functions have different exception behaviors.
// For example the exception behavior of snprintf is different from _snprintf_s:
// snprintf returns the number of characters required to print the string, not
// counting the terminating null character, regardless of the size of the buffer.
// I don't think snprintf raises exceptions.
//
// _snprintf_s returns same value as snprintf if buff is sufficiently large, but
// if buff is too small, or buff or fmt is a NULL pointer, _snprintf_s invokes the
// invalid parameter handler, sets errno = ERANGE or EINVAL, respectively,
// and returns -1.
// If return values and exception behaviors are important in your code, create
// your own functions to handle the conversions.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Overloads:
//
// The macros below handle only the most common (for me, at least) overloads.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Suggetions:
//
// Yes please. There are a ton of these MS specific "safe" functions. I've
// only done a few.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// License:
//
// I suppose someone might care about this.
// Sure, use what you like, delete what you don't. Modify it to your hearts
// content.
// I wouldn't mind getting an attaboy or something if it works (not required).
// If it doesn't work, blame MS.
//
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// #include <cstdlib> // Do I need cstdlib? Hmm...maybe for sizeof()?
#include <cstdio>
#include <string> // Need this for _stricmp
using namespace std;
// _MSC_VER = 1400 is MSVC 2005. _MSC_VER = 1600 (MSVC 2010) was the current
// value when I wrote (some of) these macros.
#if (defined(_MSC_VER) && (_MSC_VER >= 1400) )
// The function plus macro strategy could be used for most of the offending
// MS functions, particularly for maintaining consistent exception behaviors
// and return values. T
// inline is for run time efficiency, but the compiler is not
// constrained to comply.
inline extern
FILE* fcnSMacro_fopen_s(char *fname, char *mode)
{ FILE *fptr;
fopen_s(&fptr, fname, mode);
return fptr;
}
#define fopen(fname, mode) fcnSMacro_fopen_s((fname), (mode))
inline extern
char* fcnSMacro_strtok_s(char *strng, char *delimiters)
{ static char *cntx; // This static variable causes the same problem
// as the original strtok: can't alternate search
// strings in the same process (MS says "thread").
if(strng != NULL) *cntx = NULL;
char *cptr = strtok_s(strng, delimiters, &cntx);
return cptr;
}
#define strtok(strng, delim) fcnSMacro_strtok_s((strng), (delim))
#define fcloseall() _fcloseall()
// I substituded count+1 for snprintf's buffer size argument. For well
// written code, the buffer size should be at least one more than count
// to leave room for the terminating '\0'.
#define snprintf(buff, count, ...) _snprintf_s((buff), (count+1), (count), __VA_ARGS__)
#define printf(...) printf_s(__VA_ARGS__)
#define fprintf(fptr, ...) fprintf_s((fptr), __VA_ARGS__)
// I don't have a solution for mapping sprinf to sprintf_s. There are other
// functions like this.
// #define sprintf ???
// #define strcpy(s1, s2) ???
// These mappings look trivial, but the secure functions likely have different
// exception behaviors and maybe different return values.
#define fscanf fscanf_s
#define sscanf sscanf_s
#define scanf scanf_s
// strcmpi is deprecated in VS 2015. Don't know about 2013 or 2014
#define strcmpi _stricmp
// No conversion needed for strncmp (yet). I guess MS hasn't gotten around
// to it yet.
// #define strncmp ???
#define strncpy(dest, source, count) strcpy_s((dest), (count), (source))
#define strncat(dest, source, count) strcat_s((dest), (count), (source))
#else
// I usually write code in MSVS, using the standard functions, then port to linux if needed.
// I haven't though as much about the inverse macros, nor have I tested all of them.
// Test them yourself and investigate exception behaviors before using them.
#define fscanf_s fscanf
#define sscanf_s sscanf
#define scanf_s scanf
#define printf_s printf
#define sprintf_s snprintf
#define fprintf_s fprintf
#define strcpy_s(dest, count, source) strncpy( (dest), (source), (count) )
#define fopen_s(fp, fmt, mode) *(fp)=fopen( (fmt), (mode))
#define _fcloseall fcloseall
#define strtok_s strtok
#define _strcmpi strcmpi
#endif //_MSC_VER
#endif // FCN_S_MACROS_H