Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp432394ybv; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 03:17:02 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzm17t6a5V+83Hn3nbNxmQWXbyRF9Sh9rNiM8Dzz01N+qON//5iv7YiZmrjCEQiZUf0O3/2 X-Received: by 2002:aca:530e:: with SMTP id h14mr2434403oib.105.1581592622262; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 03:17:02 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581592622; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=q+PqbmJ8RsZhBeGHbAPVK3EsKnK2Ny5c/9u4i36GiWN2EkbNuZQJqKMlahXqH2dzxr /eeft/UXye96dme1Ay6dnpOZmFB5biEYbkuznxYgPFmuyh/a2P8Wwb+IPI5LR7qTHLJT 9GJoSHePKM9pQTSPIqaWl8fiNAlP96m536bQuQJPikZ0Aq7nLza69unsSB1PZnCDJKUK wDD+j52cGaoy4v/k91/AsaYobqvAY2e1GXFEl+WjOfLc8IvCy4BNfuFISDrEfbpoAg3r ZMdNqbyYaLvavdDGJb8Sw8iCNZav7k+MocXBGGrXC+Np18kCxtKQe680cDgqapqaA8Bn w8Zg== 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:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=EahyMObeOAk37W77BMRX9wpY3DUpeMPDaY0ujYtUp3U=; b=JKCinM2oAdnQ6S9kENLNo7sDIng0c8j4FbZe7ucnk3PSqav1A0qYbH+ks49eH8jxBw nghVPzKq0oowh8ZPTyOvsLGFJI+xhxRSgKx03pe1zo01ChpCDg8SdZ3pEYZAA6XS62SC zZn1tNgwg4KmX2vWOnUkw4fRqyFcymeJdX6/38hH7Vqueiz40BeIaoyTxDpBPzSxVbv9 9Ed3floroBmsF7zmAyPj7Ga7dOoqKTjZQk5/Co5ErGXpnESvmZuzThkP7vmwmYjA+9fR 8h6gRg+ONdzvG5VVtlANrotNj/bert+xPNdKi+innfm4aW5LupDZX6HQzpId5d6SEHTw 0Rmw== 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: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f17si967375oto.85.2020.02.13.03.16.50; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 03:17:02 -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 S1729754AbgBMLQn (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 13 Feb 2020 06:16:43 -0500 Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.62]:33016 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729526AbgBMLQn (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Feb 2020 06:16:43 -0500 Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1j2CU5-008W6E-30; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:16:41 +0100 Message-ID: <47ba092892a3762f42cac6f69a80622829e84827.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] cfg80211: skip strict validation for UDPATE_OWE command From: Johannes Berg To: Sergey Matyukevich Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:16:40 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20200213111300.jgb3kkvwq6am3aj7@bars> References: <20200213090657.28841-1-sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com> <20200213090657.28841-2-sergey.matyukevich.os@quantenna.com> <703b19463655cbb8a5ab9469caec5d3936dbe35d.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20200213111300.jgb3kkvwq6am3aj7@bars> 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: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 11:13 +0000, Sergey Matyukevich wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:12:47AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > [External Email]: This email arrived from an external source - Please exercise caution when opening any attachments or clicking on links. > > > > 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? > > That is why this patch is RFC: see cover email :) Ah, was on the phone and hadn't read that yet ... > Sure, I can fix hostapd instead. Could you point me at some good > starting point to look at ? Are there any user-space tools that > started to use strict validation ? It's not really opt-in or not, it's entirely a kernel choice. > P.S. > If you are ok with the second patch, then could you just take it > from this series ? Or should I resubmit ? I can just take it. johannes