LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Biggers <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Jarkko Sakkinen <email@example.com> Cc: Ahmad Fatoum <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <email@example.com>, Jaegeuk Kim <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, James Morris <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <email@example.com>, James Bottomley <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Mimi Zohar <email@example.com>, Sumit Garg <firstname.lastname@example.org>, David Howells <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fscrypt: support trusted keys Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:27:24 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YRLvPJehAeMiYb2Z@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 12:21:40AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:46:49AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 09:06:36PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I don't think this is right, or at least it does not follow the pattern > > > > > in [*]. I.e. you should rather use trusted key to seal your fscrypt key. > > > > > > > > What's the benefit of the extra layer of indirection over just using a "trusted" > > > > key directly? The use case for "encrypted" keys is not at all clear to me. > > > > > > Because it is more robust to be able to use small amount of trusted keys, > > > which are not entirely software based. > > > > > > And since it's also a pattern on existing kernel features utilizing trusted > > > keys, the pressure here to explain why break the pattern, should be on the > > > side of the one who breaks it. > > > > This is a new feature, so it's on the person proposing the feature to explain > > why it's useful. The purpose of "encrypted" keys is not at all clear, and the > > documentation for them is heavily misleading. E.g.: > > > > "user space sees, stores, and loads only encrypted blobs" > > (Not necessarily true, as I've explained previously.) > > > > "Encrypted keys do not depend on a trust source" ... "The main disadvantage > > of encrypted keys is that if they are not rooted in a trusted key" > > (Not necessarily true, and in fact it seems they're only useful when they > > *do* depend on a trust source. At least that's the use case that is being > > proposed here, IIUC.) > > > > I do see a possible use for the layer of indirection that "encrypted" keys are, > > which is that it would reduce the overhead of having lots of keys be directly > > encrypted by the TPM/TEE/CAAM. Is this the use case? If so, it needs to be > > explained. > > If trusted keys are used directly, it's an introduction of a bottleneck. > If they are used indirectly, you can still choose to have one trusted > key per fscrypt key. > > Thus, it's obviously a bad idea to use them directly. > So actually explain that in the documentation. It's not obvious at all. And does this imply that the support for trusted keys in dm-crypt is a mistake? - Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-10 21:27 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-08-06 15:09 [PATCH v2] fscrypt: support trusted keys Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-09 9:44 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-09 10:00 ` Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-09 10:02 ` Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-10 18:02 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-09 20:52 ` Eric Biggers 2021-08-10 18:06 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-10 18:46 ` Eric Biggers 2021-08-10 21:21 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-10 21:27 ` Eric Biggers [this message] 2021-08-11 0:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-11 11:34 ` Mimi Zohar 2021-08-11 17:16 ` Eric Biggers 2021-08-12 0:54 ` Mimi Zohar 2021-08-17 13:04 ` Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-17 13:55 ` Mimi Zohar 2021-08-17 14:13 ` Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-17 14:24 ` Mimi Zohar 2021-08-18 2:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen 2021-08-18 4:53 ` Sumit Garg 2021-08-09 21:24 ` Eric Biggers 2021-08-10 7:41 ` Ahmad Fatoum 2021-08-10 17:35 ` Eric Biggers
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=YRLvPJehAeMiYb2Z@gmail.com \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).