Return-path: Received: from smtp2.u-psud.fr ([129.175.33.42]:51805 "EHLO smtp2.u-psud.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753293Ab2IGMSs (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2012 08:18:48 -0400 Message-ID: <5049E62B.3050305@lri.fr> (sfid-20120907_141851_587147_11A58E59) Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 14:18:51 +0200 From: Nicolas Cavallari MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: Antonio Quartulli , "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] mac80211: export ieee80211_send_deauth_disassoc for usage outside of mlme.c References: <1346951275-32081-1-git-send-email-ordex@autistici.org> (sfid-20120906_190828_405993_603EB9FF) <1347006332.4256.9.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <5049C35A.1050601@lri.fr> <1347016689.4256.10.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <5049E236.2020502@lri.fr> <1347019529.4256.20.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1347019529.4256.20.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/09/2012 14:05, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 14:01 +0200, Nicolas Cavallari wrote: > >>>> Or just never set TX_INTFL_DONT_ENCRYPT at all and rely on >>>> ieee80211_tx_h_select_key() to do the right thing ? >>> >>> I don't think it can do the right thing, it doesn't check whether MFP is >>> enabled or not... >> >> It does; The first part try to encrypt everything, the second part >> disable encryption if ccmp is selected and !ieee80211_is_data_present && >> !ieee80211_use_mfp, >> which test, among other things, for the sta's WLAN_STA_MFP flag if sta >> != null. > > Good point. > >> If tx_h_select_key does not select the right key in this case, i think >> we have bigger problems. > > Maybe, maybe not. But it looks like it would be safe. > >>> unless you want to test all those cases I'd rather not >>> change it :) >> >> Not worth the trouble in this case, but i think there is too much code >> that sets TX_INTFL_DONT_ENCRYPT when it shouldn't. > > I already applied the v3 patchset, but even if I hadn't I'd say it > should be a separate patch(set), want to send some patches to remove > them? :) I'll do that later, along with some other 802.11 2012 crypto work.