Re: [PATCH v2] smb: client: terminate session upon failed client required signing

[Aaditya Kansal <aadityakansal390@gmail.com>]

On 2/16/26 00:01, Steve French wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 7:17 AM Aaditya Kansal
> <aadityakansal390@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/5/26 06:30, Aaditya Kansal wrote:
>>> Currently, when smb signature verification fails, the behaviour is to log
>>> the failure without any action to terminate the session.
>>>
>>> Call cifs_reconnect() when client required signature verification fails.
>>> Otherwise, log the error without reconnecting.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Aaditya Kansal <aadityakansal390@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - reconnect only triggered when client required signature verification fails
>>> ---
>>>  fs/smb/client/cifstransport.c | 10 ++++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/smb/client/cifstransport.c b/fs/smb/client/cifstransport.c
>>> index 28d1cee90625..6c1fbf0bef6d 100644
>>> --- a/fs/smb/client/cifstransport.c
>>> +++ b/fs/smb/client/cifstransport.c
>>> @@ -169,12 +169,18 @@ cifs_check_receive(struct mid_q_entry *mid, struct TCP_Server_Info *server,
>>>
>>>               iov[0].iov_base = mid->resp_buf;
>>>               iov[0].iov_len = len;
>>> -             /* FIXME: add code to kill session */
>>> +
>>>               rc = cifs_verify_signature(&rqst, server,
>>>                                          mid->sequence_number);
>>> -             if (rc)
>>> +             if (rc) {
>>>                       cifs_server_dbg(VFS, "SMB signature verification returned error = %d\n",
>>>                                rc);
>>> +
>>> +                     if (!(server->sec_mode & SECMODE_SIGN_REQUIRED)) {
>>> +                             cifs_reconnect(server, true);
>>> +                             return rc;
>>> +                     }
>>> +             }
>>>       }
>>>
>>>       /* BB special case reconnect tid and uid here? */
>> Hi, I am writing this as a ping for this patch. Thanks
> merged into cifs-2.6.git for-next but had to rebase it to merge into
> current code.
>
> Have you verified the behavior of default (smb3.1.1) mounts as well?
>
Thank you. Yes, I have checked it for the default version.
Tested for both client required and server required signature verification.

-- 
-AK