On 16.03.2022 08:35:58, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > > > On 16.03.22 02:51, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 21:37:48 +0100 Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > > > Syzbot created an environment that lead to a state machine status that > > > can not be reached with a compliant CAN ID address configuration. > > > The provided address information consisted of CAN ID 0x6000001 and 0xC28001 > > > which both boil down to 11 bit CAN IDs 0x001 in sending and receiving. > > > > > > Sanitize the SFF/EFF CAN ID values before performing the address checks. > > > > > > Fixes: e057dd3fc20f ("can: add ISO 15765-2:2016 transport protocol") > > > Reported-by: syzbot+2339c27f5c66c652843e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp > > > > CC Marc, please make sure you CC maintainers. > > Oh, that would have been better! I'm maintaining the CAN network layer stuff > together with Marc and there was no relevant stuff in can-next to be pulled > in the next days. So I sent it directly to hit the merge window and had all > of us in the reply to the syzbot report. > > Will CC Marc next time when posting to netdev only! > > Maybe I treated this patch more urgent than it needed to be handled > ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Should this go into net/master with stable on Cc or to net-next? Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |