From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-43101.protonmail.ch (mail-43101.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.101]) (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 221551A9F9F; Thu, 4 Jun 2026 10:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.70.43.101 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780568269; cv=none; b=EC2BqKDRj04008FrkTKM1G99NQGfix8g5shb6xRJo+rEb+E+I+zwv0+Iu6Eil7fjIr4cKSNppJ1SSKOdoRkO/Ot8guLd0mxrx6pXJr4qb+R0AJypEE+Sw7/sCxMmOsyDq5HRXTPbr0+GqoIuftsBkxxCn55NewV+KseVEAG0478= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780568269; c=relaxed/simple; bh=H3FPW24X3zlDpiZIK2TAWDlQeWlDbZS5WfTjTZDSME8=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=omBKyAoxP1iQR4CBY9MyUGK0MFOomIGrCWX7RwL0dqt4TVdwtV/JVCRQLeWolh5UGEGH9l0pojyN/1qwGQseAAIINRDCpzVy9lcGtLxvXfSJTs68GryRZaE85+P6yZIv1WnVcoGfq7rjbrzmSsrM1HfVlAObNtWExsN4hye/S2U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=proton.me; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=proton.me; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=proton.me header.i=@proton.me header.b=I53qAd/q; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.70.43.101 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=proton.me Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=proton.me Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=proton.me header.i=@proton.me header.b="I53qAd/q" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=proton.me; s=protonmail; t=1780568262; x=1780827462; bh=Vc21Ap6crSXxT7y7bF9f92EbYAhOW76rAEBjgxkDio4=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=I53qAd/qim10NF8wIYqutWe0CHsviE7gTjiy6LxtuZQA4fvrT24J+Kkm94H7HRrxK qF0Txs/tEAThCuaY5bDGuKQpq65ABC/ttjtB5azXjgJ8ZareywnM7XwMgQB4GZ9sbF 11IXJniCInhHGZ1HpcfyLtAf3K/rNH2R4mYEwHUDIfmuvCKwgh2ch3/qcC+vvZQD61 LU5HwR3kFX/einPSzdC3aG9R3Z0Hb1d3N7g6odYQdfSFmt/0ZPdq5pAXzUS7nuQDqq Llz8QirY/FFDCoIxk3P+b3CPhuuGK9aimaN1cjdFDJKRtsKusY/GbUpcjfe+qs++88 ZYsseR2TQ1CRw== Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 10:17:37 +0000 To: Hyunchul Lee From: Bryam Vargas Cc: Namjae Jeon , DaeMyung Kang , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ntfs: validate $FILE_NAME length before converting the name Message-ID: <20260604101733.132709-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me> In-Reply-To: References: <20260604053921.100409-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me> Feedback-ID: 199661219:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 7a6933492a00fd3dba97324ae07bd1f546cc49fd Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Hyunchul, > There is already a patch that validates this in ntfs_attr_lookup(). > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260530143514.3083601-2-charsyam@gmail.com Right -- DaeMyung Kang's "[PATCH v4 1/6] ntfs: validate attribute values on lookup" already rejects a $FILE_NAME whose file_name_length overruns the resident value_length (ntfs_file_name_attr_value_is_valid()), and does it i= n ntfs_attr_lookup() so every caller is covered, not just ntfs_is_extended_system_file(). That subsumes this patch -- please drop it= . I'll leave the fs/ntfs attribute-value hardening to that series. Bryam