Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:54399 "EHLO mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752088AbeEHMSl (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2018 08:18:41 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id f6so18459672wmc.4 for ; Tue, 08 May 2018 05:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211: Reject disconnect commands except from conn_owner To: Johannes Berg , Andrew Zaborowski , Kalle Valo References: <20180428014732.4018-1-andrew.zaborowski@intel.com> <87in8b8ooy.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> <1525720752.22388.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org From: Arend van Spriel Message-ID: <5AF1959E.6020605@broadcom.com> (sfid-20180508_141846_122361_0D8A6243) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 14:18:38 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1525720752.22388.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 5/7/2018 9:19 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sun, 2018-04-29 at 20:30 +0200, Andrew Zaborowski wrote: >> On 28 April 2018 at 15:07, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Andrew Zaborowski writes: >>>> Reject NL80211_CMD_DISCONNECT, NL80211_CMD_DISASSOCIATE, >>>> NL80211_CMD_DEAUTHENTICATE and NL80211_CMD_ASSOCIATE commands >>>> from clients other than the connection owner set in the connect, >>>> authenticate or associate commands, if it was set. >>>> >>>> The main point of this check is to prevent chaos when two processes >>>> try to use nl80211 at the same time, it's not a security measure. >>>> The same thing should possibly be done for JOIN_IBSS/LEAVE_IBSS and >>>> START_AP/STOP_AP. >>> >>> s-o-b missing. >> >> True, thanks. Also I was going to send this as an RFC. >> > Looks fine to me, please resend if you want it in :) Do we really want this? Is the referred chaos hypothetical or an actual issue. Nothing stops me from doing an 'ifconfig down' so why should 'iw disconnect' be any different. As far I can tell it does not affect my testing environment, but particularly in such use-cases I can expect issues adopting this change, which is also hypothetical of course ;-) Regards, Arend