> Can you please check again: did you experience this condition, to me it
> seems the patch is based on reading this code.
>
I saw this while reading the code.
> In this case, please consider the condition before the switch statement:
>
> /* Check if this isn't a single byte option */
> if (opt > DCCPO_MAX_RESERVED) {
> if (opt_ptr == opt_end)
> goto out_nonsensical_length;
>
> len = *opt_ptr++;
> if (len < 2)
> goto out_nonsensical_length;
>
> The described range (DCCPO_CHANGE_L = 32 ... DCCPO_CONFIRM_R = 35) is after DCCPO_MAX_RESERVED = 31,
> so that the above test applies.
>
> Hence for these option types the len is always at least 1, so that (len - 1) >= 0.
>
You just missed the important part:
if (len < 2)
goto out_nonsensical_length;
/*
* Remove the type and len fields, leaving
* just the value size
*/
len -= 2;
If the len is 2, this check will pass, and the resulting len will be 0,
causing the underflow.
Regards,
Dan
> | --- a/net/dccp/options.c
> | +++ b/net/dccp/options.c
> | @@ -123,6 +123,8 @@ int dccp_parse_options(struct sock *sk, struct dccp_request_sock *dreq,
> | case DCCPO_CHANGE_L ... DCCPO_CONFIRM_R:
> | if (pkt_type == DCCP_PKT_DATA) /* RFC 4340, 6 */
> | break;
> | + if (len == 0)
> | + goto out_invalid_option;
> | rc = dccp_feat_parse_options(sk, dreq, mandatory, opt,
> | *value, value + 1, len - 1);
> | if (rc)
> |
> |
>
> --
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
