Re: [PATCH 1/5] ath: Use safer key clearing with key cache entries

[Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>]

Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> writes:

> On Thursday 17 December 2020 18:06:27 Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On Thursday 17 December 2020 06:51:48 Kalle Valo wrote:
>> >> Jouni Malinen <jouni@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > It is possible for there to be pending frames in TXQs with a reference
>> >> > to the key cache entry that is being deleted. If such a key cache entry
>> >> > is cleared, those pending frame in TXQ might get transmitted without
>> >> > proper encryption. It is safer to leave the previously used key into the
>> >> > key cache in such cases. Instead, only clear the MAC address to prevent
>> >> > RX processing from using this key cache entry.
>> >> > 
>> >> > This is needed in particularly in AP mode where the TXQs cannot be
>> >> > flushed on station disconnection. This change alone may not be able to
>> >> > address all cases where the key cache entry might get reused for other
>> >> > purposes immediately (the key cache entry should be released for reuse
>> >> > only once the TXQs do not have any remaining references to them), but
>> >> > this makes it less likely to get unprotected frames and the more
>> >> > complete changes may end up being significantly more complex.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Jouni Malinen <jouni@codeaurora.org>
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
>> >> 
>> >> 5 patches applied to ath-next branch of ath.git, thanks.
>> >> 
>> >> 56c5485c9e44 ath: Use safer key clearing with key cache entries
>> >> 73488cb2fa3b ath9k: Clear key cache explicitly on disabling hardware
>> >> d2d3e36498dd ath: Export ath_hw_keysetmac()
>> >> 144cd24dbc36 ath: Modify ath_key_delete() to not need full key entry
>> >> ca2848022c12 ath9k: Postpone key cache entry deletion for TXQ frames reference it
>> >
>> > Hello! Should not these patches be suitable for backporting into stable
>> > kernels (via CC: stable@ commit message line) as they are related to
>> > security issue CVE-2020-3702?
>> 
>> Yeah, but you were just a little late as I already applied them.
>
> Ok, would you then send these patches to stable manually?

Sorry, I have too many patches in queue to do that. But I don't think I
need to submit them, my understanding is that anyone can submit patches
to stable.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches