From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sender-op-o18.zoho.eu (sender-op-o18.zoho.eu [136.143.169.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED0C43A785A for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2026 07:22:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.169.18 ARC-Seal:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784877723; cv=pass; b=F9LeGj5IiZIAaHnFAHVLBgw9HGkpqmIXqdyt0ZBqMSREzEqkjOMGjLz4Km06wubYKjdQoeAxVDcJAgp9BOyfK58mZWJJezgQoo7sVdrlJbOoelqto+hwwDNWQKtUZzcBGmdLw9Qq8U2eEk0af6Dt8XIGt7hnkuvx2jFGe0/r0wc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784877723; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vdFbwDzfIG/+VeTlPkValVFNo8EhGWuBH5PqrMKItmE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=PLp12C3X5ntnHufZNpUx+Mhz2K+10tO3M20tZJNeTGYkP48faxGw98MqxKibFTNm1REyEKBK90jPU21ZfiRvsyVvjSwTUypVWQtpFr+78fZkb5hsZXA7hL72HFDSUJqg+IZH5MBsTot/u7MA7KGbFbsKERpN+DqpS+me0Zw7M3U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=2; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=auditcode.ai; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=auditcode.ai; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=auditcode.ai header.i=security@auditcode.ai header.b=cgM2bzO4; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.169.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=auditcode.ai Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=auditcode.ai Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=auditcode.ai header.i=security@auditcode.ai header.b="cgM2bzO4" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1784877686; cv=none; d=zohomail.eu; s=zohoarc; b=PBabhCW8EadIna8APdGN2/uEzY4HyOOlHYeTxvzqlnSyEJW6QQ1/fiv1VDeOqRKQ/29jXV0ySiciRT8dX+LlJ1zJex4R3j0KOg3RhsAUVMtrspzJ3qufhMREVmJwygz0h8YaiugSIQ5Siq7CvIMNcwV5zvRKEorVGD0ywrWaq8w= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.eu; s=zohoarc; t=1784877686; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=yIZl7S9SIcidyW9IQWtVIrd8c51ONJX47pUN0klN0d0=; b=WD4oi9ZU47GM+OaqaodO3WfP6oBZM8lGtwrkUMUK0lAKb0+bOSpGKGqofmlCIqqF7GpxYsnnRm6fqTBKl+9vL6uxgSFM0NN53Tucfm/7W8nKnIenottqGX3lwc1+Ih1TscYli1EF5whE0U4j/oKJ8Iu79XZGxv1tKx1gw8kezpw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.eu; dkim=pass header.i=auditcode.ai; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=security@auditcode.ai; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1784877686; s=zmail; d=auditcode.ai; i=security@auditcode.ai; h=From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:Subject:Subject:Date:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=yIZl7S9SIcidyW9IQWtVIrd8c51ONJX47pUN0klN0d0=; b=cgM2bzO4So8QbU+jznahh0DbajOt8nwSfAUiWpmnAD5MVAkn642LXAYkxXBJa2Di q3uRh4mScZl3QdaRXJjvVwYDIBan8NKO+WDOMjcY81f0BkG7dEOcCbkrdAg1DSGmpKa f+CuUqTnaOyZy3MoeOE2xwKEHk1DNV96cRc21Wmg= Received: by mx.zoho.eu with SMTPS id 178487768122574.5123130490988; Fri, 24 Jul 2026 09:21:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Ibrahim Hashimov To: hexlabsecurity@proton.me Cc: dust.li@linux.alibaba.com, alibuda@linux.alibaba.com, wenjia@linux.ibm.com, tonylu@linux.alibaba.com, guwen@linux.alibaba.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/smc: validate peer CDC cursor against RMBE size before accepting it Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 09:21:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20260724072117.73038-1-security@auditcode.ai> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.50.1 In-Reply-To: <20260723230647.138311-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me> References: <20260723230647.138311-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ZohoMailClient: External > The insight is yours either way -- may I add your Suggested-by (or > Co-developed-by)? Please do, and thanks for running it end to end. Suggested-by is the honest one -- I pointed at the gap and the advance-bound, you did the series. If you carry the if (smc_curs_diff(size, &old, &temp) > size) return; verbatim, Co-developed-by is fine too, your call. Either way: Ibrahim Hashimov And your split is right -- advance-bound as the early catch, bytes_to_rcv after the atomic_add for the accumulation the per-cursor check can't see. Thanks, Ibrahim