From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Doruk Tan Ozturk <doruk@0sec.ai>
Cc: David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz>,
oe-linux-nfc@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] nfc: st21nfca: validate ATR_REQ length against the received frame
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 15:58:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260716145846.GM95246@horms.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260711071301.58071-1-doruk@0sec.ai>
On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 09:13:01AM +0200, Doruk Tan Ozturk wrote:
> st21nfca_tm_recv_atr_req() checks that the received ATR_REQ frame is at
> least ST21NFCA_ATR_REQ_MIN_SIZE and that the self-declared atr_req->length
> is at least sizeof(struct st21nfca_atr_req), but never checks that
> atr_req->length does not exceed the actual received length (skb->len).
>
> st21nfca_tm_send_atr_res() then trusts the declared length:
>
> gb_len = atr_req->length - sizeof(struct st21nfca_atr_req);
> ...
> memcpy(atr_res->gbi, atr_req->gbi, gb_len);
>
> so an RF peer that sends a short frame but sets atr_req->length larger
> than the frame makes gb_len exceed the general bytes actually present,
> and the memcpy reads out of bounds past the received skb. Those bytes are
> placed in the ATR_RES and sent back to the peer (kernel-memory disclosure
> to a proximity attacker); a larger declared length is an out-of-bounds
> read (DoS).
>
> Reject frames whose declared length exceeds the received length. The
> adjacent nfc_tm_activated() path in the same function already derives its
> general-bytes length from skb->len rather than the declared field.
>
> Found by 0sec (https://0sec.ai) using automated source analysis; the
> missing bound is evident from source. Compile-tested.
>
> Fixes: 1892bf844ea0 ("NFC: st21nfca: Adding P2P support to st21nfca in Initiator & Target mode")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: 0sec:claude-opus-4-8
> Signed-off-by: Doruk Tan Ozturk <doruk@0sec.ai>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
FTR, the AI-generated review of this patch on sashiko.dev does seem to
raise legitimate pre-existing issues which relate closely to this patch.
But I think they can be treated as potential follow-up rather than impeding
progress of this patch.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-16 14:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-11 7:13 [PATCH net] nfc: st21nfca: validate ATR_REQ length against the received frame Doruk Tan Ozturk
2026-07-16 14:58 ` Simon Horman [this message]
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=20260716145846.GM95246@horms.kernel.org \
--to=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=david@ixit.cz \
--cc=doruk@0sec.ai \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oe-linux-nfc@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox