Patchlage

CVE-2026-80800

CVE CVE-2026-80800EUVD EUVD-2026-71235Published 2026-09-04T15:13:14.000Z

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfc: llcp: bound the connect_sn TLV walk to the skb Commit 27256cdb290e ("nfc: llcp: bound SNL TLV parsing to the skb and add length checks") fixed the unbounded TLV walk in nfc_llcp_recv_snl(), and commit d8bd2dedbde5 ("nfc: llcp: fix OOB read and u8 offset wrap in TLV parsers") subsequently bounded nfc_llcp_parse_gb_tlv() and nfc_llcp_parse_connection_tlv(). One sibling parser sharing the same pattern remains unbounded: nfc_llcp_connect_sn(). nfc_llcp_connect_sn() walks a TLV list, reading a two-byte header (type, length) followed by length bytes of value, without checking that the two header bytes or the declared length stay within the buffer. It returns a pointer to a service name of up to 255 bytes that may point past the end of the skb; it is subsequently consumed by memcmp() in nfc_llcp_sock_from_sn(). In addition tlv_array_len was computed as "skb->len - LLCP_HEADER_SIZE" in size_t, so a CONNECT/CC frame shorter than the LLCP header underflows to a huge length and the walk runs far past the buffer. nfc_llcp_connect_sn() is reachable from nfc_llcp_recv_connect() and nfc_llcp_recv_cc(), i.e. from received CONNECT and CC PDUs. A nearby NFC device can reach this without authentication; LLCP link activation happens automatically after NFC-DEP, and the nfc_llcp_rx_skb() dispatcher applies no minimum-length guard. Walk the TLV list by pointer, bounded by skb_tail_pointer(skb), and validate each declared length before use, matching the approach already used for nfc_llcp_recv_snl(). Starting the walk at &skb->data[LLCP_HEADER_SIZE] against the tail pointer also removes the size_t underflow for short frames. Found by 0sec automated security-research tooling (https://0sec.ai).

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.