From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Proposal for keying encrypted filesystem Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 10:06:45 +0400 Message-ID: <3E8A7DF5.9070302@namesys.com> References: <200303282026.23543.phma@webjockey.net> <76105761281.20030401181632@tnonline.net> <3E89BC94.5030308@namesys.com> <200304012156.56798.phma@webjockey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <200304012156.56798.phma@webjockey.net> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Pierre Abbat Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com Pierre Abbat wrote: >On Tuesday 01 April 2003 11:21, Hans Reiser wrote: > > >>I think it is essential to the task that apps not be aware of keys. >> >> > >Indeed. The reiser4-specific syscall should insert or delete a key into the >database; > why? > to open a file you use the generic open() syscall, which passes the >filename to reiser4, which then asks the plugin if it has the key, and fails >if it doesn't. The only time you should need to use a reiser4-specific call >to open a file is when you need to read or write the ciphertext, which Bob >needs to do when he backs up to tape (or another disk) the data which Alice >backed up to him. This also needs special read and write calls, as you need >to know how long each block (stored as a tail) is, because it's compressed. > >I'd also like to see some other protocols using an encrypted filesystem, >especially ones using public key, as I don't understand why you need public >key encryption in a filesystem. > >phma > > -- Hans