vquic: fix recvmsg loop for max_pkts #19186
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The parameter `max_pkts` was not checked in the recvmsg() implementation of vquic_recv_packets() as the packter counter was never increased. This led to the loop running until an EAGAIN was encountered. Which, in any real case scenario, does no harm as long as libcurl is ingesting packets faster than a server is able to send them. However on a slow device and a fast network this could happen and allow a denial of serice. Not a real regression as the vulnerable code has never been released. libcurl 8.16.0 does not have this bug.
bagder
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The parameter
max_pktswas not checked in the recvmsg() implementation of vquic_recv_packets() as the packter counter was never increased. This led to the loop running until an EAGAIN was encountered. Which, in any real case scenario, does no harm as long as libcurl is ingesting packets faster than a server is able to send them.However on a slow device and a fast network this could happen and allow a denial of serice.
Not a real regression as the vulnerable code has never been released. libcurl 8.16.0 does not have this bug.