From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
To: Sriram Sriram <sriramsriram@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: u-boot@lists.u-boot-project.org,
Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@arm.com>,
Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>,
Drew Kluemke <ankluemk@microsoft.com>,
Daniel Munic <v-dmunic@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] net: tftp: use bounded string compare for OACK option parsing
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:25:38 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260910192538.GO1764417@bill-the-cat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260909192016.217183-4-sriramsriram@linux.microsoft.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1227 bytes --]
On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 12:20:15PM -0700, Sriram Sriram wrote:
> From: Drew Kluemke <ankluemk@microsoft.com>
>
> The TFTP OACK handler matches option names in the received packet with
> strcasecmp(), which scans until a NUL byte. A malformed or truncated
> OACK packet may not contain a NUL within the received length, causing
> an out-of-bounds read past the packet buffer.
>
> Replace each strcasecmp() with a strncasecmp() bounded to the option
> name length plus an explicit check that the name is NUL-terminated at
> the expected position. For the "windowsize" option, whose name and
> value extend beyond the loop's "i + 8 < len" guard, add an explicit
> "i + 11 < len" bound before the comparison.
>
> Signed-off-by: Drew Kluemke <ankluemk@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sriram Sriram <sriramsriram@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> net/tftp.c | 13 +++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Does the spec/RFC ensure that we're being given a NULL terminated string
here? It certainly makes sense to be using strncasecmp here, but since
we're a size constrained bootloader, we do need to find the right
balance between defense-in-depth and potential exposure.
--
Tom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-10 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-09 19:20 [PATCH 0/4] Bounds/overflow hardening in NFS, FIT, TFTP and ext4 Sriram Sriram
2026-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] net: nfs: add bounds checks on memcpy into stack-allocated rpc_pkt Sriram Sriram
2026-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] boot: image-fit: add overflow guard for FIT decompression buffer Sriram Sriram
2026-09-10 19:09 ` Tom Rini
2026-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH 3/4] net: tftp: use bounded string compare for OACK option parsing Sriram Sriram
2026-09-10 19:25 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2026-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH 4/4] fs: ext4: widen ext4fs_update() block-group loop counter Sriram Sriram
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260910192538.GO1764417@bill-the-cat \
--to=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=ankluemk@microsoft.com \
--cc=jerome.forissier@arm.com \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=sriramsriram@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.u-boot-project.org \
--cc=v-dmunic@microsoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.