Re: [PATCH 2/2] smb: client: fix OOB reads parsing symlink error response

From: ChenXiaoSong

Date: Wed Apr 08 2026 - 05:04:08 EST


Sashiko reported the following out-of-bounds issue. I have checked and confirmed that this indeed causes an OOB access.

When create fails on symlink, `len` in `smb2_check_message()` may be smaller than `calc_len`. The function flow is as follows:

```
smb2_check_message()
// ensure StructureSize2 is 9
if (... pdu->StructureSize2 != SMB2_ERROR_STRUCTURE_SIZE2_LE ...) // false
smb2_calc_size()
len = le16_to_cpu(shdr->StructureSize) == 64
len += le16_to_cpu(pdu->StructureSize2) == 64 + 9
smb2_get_data_area_len
if (shdr->StructureSize == 9) // true, return NULL
calc_len == 64 + 9
if (len != calc_len) { // true
/* create failed on symlink */
if (command == SMB2_CREATE_HE && shdr->Status == STATUS_STOPPED_ON_SYMLINK) // true
```



Should we add the following check? Or check it in symlink_data()?

```
-- a/fs/smb/client/smb2misc.c
+++ b/fs/smb/client/smb2misc.c
@@ -241,7 +241,8 @@ smb2_check_message(char *buf, unsigned int pdu_len, unsigned int len,
if (len != calc_len) {
/* create failed on symlink */
if (command == SMB2_CREATE_HE &&
- shdr->Status == STATUS_STOPPED_ON_SYMLINK)
+ shdr->Status == STATUS_STOPPED_ON_SYMLINK &&
+ len > calc_len)
return 0;
/* Windows 7 server returns 24 bytes more */
if (calc_len + 24 == len && command == SMB2_OPLOCK_BREAK_HE)

```

--- a/fs/smb/client/smb2file.c
+++ b/fs/smb/client/smb2file.c
@@ -27,10 +27,11 @@ static struct smb2_symlink_err_rsp *symlink_data(const struct kvec *iov)
{
struct smb2_err_rsp *err = iov->iov_base;
struct smb2_symlink_err_rsp *sym = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+ u8 *end = (u8 *)err + iov->iov_len;
u32 len;
if (err->ErrorContextCount) {
Since smb2_check_message() returns success without length validation for
the symlink error response, is it possible for iov->iov_len to be smaller
than sizeof(struct smb2_err_rsp)?
If the buffer only contains the base SMB2 header (64 bytes), does accessing
err->ErrorContextCount (at offset 66) or err->ByteCount later in this
function cause an out-of-bounds read?

--
ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong@xxxxxxxxxx>
Chinese Homepage: chenxiaosong.com
English Homepage: chenxiaosong.com/en