CVE-2026-80800

What it is

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).

At a glance

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.

Timeline

1. 2026-09-04 16:18 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-10-19 09:17 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: not scored yet.
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2026-09-04 16:18 UTC

Last modified

2026-10-19 09:17 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Received

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2026-80800.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-80800. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge