From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Edward Shushkin Subject: Re: Proposal for keying encrypted filesystem Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 19:11:20 +0400 Sender: edward Message-ID: <3E8AFD98.6EA33B68@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 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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; to open a file you use the generic open() syscall, which passes the > filename to reiser4, No, generic sys_open() should return error for encryption file pathname. > 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. All this work do reiser4 specific part of vfs's read(), write(). We only need special sys_open(). Other methods remain the same. > > 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. Why not? Maybe Bob will want to create a file so that nobody but Alice can read it.. Edward. > > phma > -- > .i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do > .ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga > .icu'u la ma'atman.