Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp334524ybv;
        Thu, 13 Feb 2020 01:13:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxJUNSxZmCCAQlDn3N0WE5T+cnQ9eKx9wOPqRyNlQ0A1cecXbMuPstaRs98O5t60nOKz5YL
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1218:: with SMTP id r24mr12996605otp.144.1581585183025;
        Thu, 13 Feb 2020 01:13:03 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581585183; cv=none;
        d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
        b=UrwJyOUTZpU+Ux37rXWKKRNF7p2/NrXj/TQi0FOAU/PWUPv5ChtbvZ6BwwfjPGmNRT
         vTRuXOlbrRaRjDFQ3p/No/zibpCUoQYyt72Iw8i2fG1X1IRw6qjIxkjD/ypIgQh/P+lK
         C+JIc47lfgh6BR1+uIEjXcbha78XU1c0jZaC4kXyR1lhP6sNTz9pD+cX2039LzOWrhMq
         SeFbrB1OYbZ7NNVUc6q7mm+NESjcaIbAlSn6HK62QBbP4CiL7fZEXtzwlLAen7q4l6cU
         p9oeB7IKRSKJZH4+C3CNJCcuaHboOXgsCMNlqImCDcXyNTDyv2ReWBuzoQ6ev5mk6u5V
         peOw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
        h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version
         :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:to:from:subject:message-id;
        bh=knZvSlUr4a1HrTLOiOyhEbzoUKjxw5nxCp9WskLoveA=;
        b=M8uVNTip7/33+ZXdfkQFmB7+nbO8c4SlsUxGbtlKrv4mTTiSZc4qqHN5TrbMxliStY
         CtJ+ioiMlBLN7JHFAaNQzpah8e7BzkpSKN6xEQWe6EStCqMXC9tK1BLylhda/bLLbXFO
         porG3oY8imogSoxmNmHaFefkrb8YYPUXwMkZ91QM61lC9hR/CEBFuplL+emRpP7Oq1Ft
         ACoCMF+KO9Lus7soHNlgMM0G7iu9CL+OeVHYSLbuh8Yw7ZOXAsXkJRG1/RwIlhY0VKkW
         BzDrVXzRKhZKHzWw5EQMnAZYmZcE6ODxTNWNod2zItjbeoLws5Z8EXRJf6MJSKOV3IlF
         n4IA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n14si800285otk.179.2020.02.13.01.12.51;
        Thu, 13 Feb 2020 01:13:03 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1729586AbgBMJMu (ORCPT <rfc822;pgnet.dev@gmail.com> + 99 others);
        Thu, 13 Feb 2020 04:12:50 -0500
Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.62]:58444 "EHLO
        sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1729531AbgBMJMu (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 13 Feb 2020 04:12:50 -0500
Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
        (Exim 4.93)
        (envelope-from <johannes@sipsolutions.net>)
        id 1j2AYC-008GOo-L5; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 10:12:48 +0100
Message-ID: <703b19463655cbb8a5ab9469caec5d3936dbe35d.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] cfg80211: skip strict validation for UDPATE_OWE
 command
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Sergey Matyukevich <sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com>,
        "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 13 Feb 2020 10:12:47 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20200213090657.28841-2-sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com>
References: <20200213090657.28841-1-sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com>
         <20200213090657.28841-2-sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 (3.34.2-1.fc31) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 09:07 +0000, Sergey Matyukevich wrote:
> Do not perform strict validation of UPDATE_OWE command.
> Otherwise, kernel rejects command executed by hostapd.

Can't we fix hostapd? I mean, it's a relatively new command, so why
shouldn't we validate it strictly?

johannes