[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260104101323.1ac8b478@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2026 10:13:23 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Michael Thalmeier <michael.thalmeier@...e.at>
Cc: Deepak Sharma <deepak.sharma.472935@...il.com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk@...nel.org>, Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>, Simon
Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Michael Thalmeier
<michael@...lmeier.at>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] net: nfc: nci: Fix parameter validation for
packet data
On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 08:25:52 +0100 Michael Thalmeier wrote:
> diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c b/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c
> index 418b84e2b260..a5cafcd10cc3 100644
> --- a/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c
> +++ b/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c
> @@ -380,6 +384,10 @@ static int nci_rf_discover_ntf_packet(struct nci_dev *ndev,
> pr_debug("rf_tech_specific_params_len %d\n",
> ntf.rf_tech_specific_params_len);
>
> + if (skb->len < (data - skb->data) +
> + ntf.rf_tech_specific_params_len + sizeof(ntf.ntf_type))
> + return -EINVAL;
Are we validating ntf.rf_tech_specific_params_len against the
extraction logic in nci_extract_rf_params_nfca_passive_poll()
and friends?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists