From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (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 B569B32BF5D; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 07:24:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775892263; cv=none; b=NwXVUPgQfNtAsS5J1ozA50YAnS3Bawvu6XhrpwZHWjQ5j7rdlt3W1ZUiJ+2n0ajMtisZzA76bwAWdqfmDvuPWLduuf55lWZsk6AHrm/9Aec5xeMo5RRRAPiX1xbbNy/HqhtlbErf4Z4t2SXfHxxzlUetoooRq0PjT5X1ORda2hE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775892263; c=relaxed/simple; bh=069FMlWOZ762g0DeUeR14CPGc6EqxAXTGHYAIw3GVk0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=dLjXBk6KLn0rzYRsnOjhlIf/xN8EjaxT3dUlL4nn/oPxUEzJfJoAGTWLUZaHIPIvndxb9RAFhLSXg7t+qLBqzzuUi6kM6CPyKZmsPpeAD5vgyGkXma3DpjRIwMCxVd5/dOBZowmeIi3idQANem7BLFcuvHIYtD8fPOIOwthFhFk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=blemings.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=blemings.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=blemings.org header.i=@blemings.org header.b=EajprrFB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=blemings.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=blemings.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=blemings.org header.i=@blemings.org header.b="EajprrFB" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blemings.org; s=202501; t=1775892260; bh=P587PAWRGw5EUkO02MO/7KJsYZrtrTl7DRb/I70f/MY=; h=Date:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=EajprrFBd6AVXrhTOjX2ojMIrGdHgYj2g01kY5P15sTRCV7bVbJhSd0n/y2n4PrkW o+g/kgXFGFNSc9erd2gQVi80ePzK+7Kj1OExRz4Nt+tVH2ejDqCG3q78NqjkIYsF++ 7Lzu0vAl25VDwkSWswd0OCUGIwjHFP1rTHdRIxdmimosykdDtZ47V8RjspW/ktovcc k+2URIebwr5Dwb7kz0OXS5+UuLchhYxKDAHa9MdUKMmV7Oiw24rg7KXwB5JSQiezkG aDlg447v12m/vhuKE9E9FuOkpSLg/2NYrGXxQ/U21plTlSW7o3Qbx3bsF9i7pYRcNn eJi7LDw3460Ow== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ft4t96DBgz4wJP; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 17:24:17 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2026 17:24:17 +1000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Reply-To: hugh@blemings.id.au Subject: Re: [PATCH net] netrom: do some basic forms of validation on incoming frames To: Greg KH , hugh@blemings.id.au Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima , kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, linux-hams@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, stable@kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, yizhe@darknavy.com References: <20260410145448.38253e3c@kernel.org> <20260410221220.1708137-1-kuniyu@google.com> <4f5810a7-c792-4d6b-9f7c-6c6b289def19@blemings.org> <2026041135-shindig-trekker-5d06@gregkh> Content-Language: en-US From: Hugh Blemings In-Reply-To: <2026041135-shindig-trekker-5d06@gregkh> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/4/2026 15:50, Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2026 at 08:25:19AM +1000, Hugh Blemings wrote: >> On 11/4/2026 08:11, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: >>> From: Jakub Kicinski >>> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:54:48 -0700 >>>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:30:42 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 07:24:36 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 08:32:35PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>>>>>> Or for simplicity we could also be testing against skb_headlen() >>>>>>> since we don't expect any legit non-linear frames here? Dunno. >>>>>> I'll be glad to change this either way, your call. Given that this is >>>>>> an obsolete protocol that seems to only be a target for drive-by fuzzers >>>>>> to attack, whatever the simplest thing to do to quiet them up I'll be >>>>>> glad to implement. >>>>>> >>>>>> Or can we just delete this stuff entirely? :) >>>>> Yes. >>>>> >>>>> My thinking is to delete hamradio, nfc, atm, caif.. [more to come] >>>>> Create GH repos which provide them as OOT modules. >>>>> Hopefully we can convince any existing users to switch to that. >>>>> >>>>> The only thing stopping me is the concern that this is just the softest >>>>> target and the LLMs will find something else to focus on which we can't >>>>> delete. I suspect any PCIe driver can be flooded with "aren't you >>>>> trusting the HW to provide valid responses here?" bullshit. >>>>> >>>>> But hey, let's try. I'll post a patch nuking all of hamradio later >>>>> today. >>>> Well, either we "expunge" this code to OOT repos, or we mark it >>>> as broken and tell everyone that we don't take security fixes >>>> for anything that depends on BROKEN. I'd personally rather expunge. >>> +1 for "expunge" to prevent LLM-based patch flood. >>> >>> IIRC, we did that recently for one driver only used by OpenWRT ? >>> >>> >> If the main concern here is ongoing maintenance of these Ham Radio related >> protocols/drivers, can we pause for a moment on anything as dramatic as >> removing from the tree entirely ? > Sure, but: > >> There is a good cohort of capable kernel folks that either are or were ham >> radio operators who I believe, upon realising that things have got to this >> point, will be happy to redouble efforts to ensure this code maintained and >> tested to a satisfactory standard. > We need this code to be maintained, because as is being shown, there are > reported problems with it that will affect these devices/networks that > you all are using. So all we need is a maintainer for this to be able > to take reports that we get and fix things up as needed. I know you > have that experience, want to come back to kernel development, we've > missed you :) That's most kind Greg, thank you, have missed all you cool kids too :) More seriously though - I'd be up for doing it, but I think there may be others better placed than I who haven't yet realised we have this conundrum. I'm nudging a few folks offline on this front. I've also kicked off a thread in linux-hams to discuss some of the broader questions raised about staying in tree, going to out of tree or looking at userspace solutions instead. We'll try get a cohesive picture back over next few days. Cheers, Hugh -- I am slowly moving to hugh@blemings.id.au as my main email address. If you're using hugh@blemings.org please update your address book accordingly. Thank you :)