From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E6CC2BA83 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 09:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C8B20848 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 09:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729600AbgBMJMu (ORCPT ); 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 ); 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 ) 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 To: Sergey Matyukevich , "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: 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