From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Jes Sorensen <jes@trained-monkey.org>
Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Subject: Re: fsverity PAGE_SIZE constraints
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:36:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200601203647.GB168749@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69713333-8072-adf0-a6bb-8f73b3c390d0@trained-monkey.org>
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 04:13:45PM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am working on adding fsverity support to RPM and I am hitting a tricky
> problem. I am see this with RPM, but it really isn't specific to RPM,
> and will apply to any method for distribution signatures.
>
> fsverity is currently hard-wiring the Merkle tree block size to
> PAGE_SIZE. This is problematic for a number of reasons, in particular on
> architectures that can be configured with different page sizes, such as
> ARM, as well as the case where someone generates a shared 'common'
> package to be used cross architectures (noarch package in RPM terms).
>
> For a package manager to be able to create a generic package with
> signatures, it basically has to build a signature for every supported
> page size of the target architecture.
>
> Chris Mason is working on adding fsverity support to btrfs, and I
> understand he is supporting 4K as the default Merkle tree block size,
> independent of the PAGE_SIZE.
>
> Would it be feasible to make ext4 and other file systems support 4K for
> non 4K page sized systems and make that a general recommendation going
> forward?
>
It's possible, but it will be a little difficult. We made a similar
simplification for ext4 encryption initially, and it took a long time to remove
it. (ext4 encryption was first supported in Linux v4.1. ext4 encryption didn't
support block_size != PAGE_SIZE until Linux v5.5, following work by
Chandan Rajendra and myself.)
Fixing this would require a number of different changes:
- Updating fscrypt_verify_bio() and fsverity_verity_page() to iterate through
all data blocks in each page, and to handle sub-page Merkle tree blocks
- Defining a mechanism other than PageChecked to mark Merkle tree blocks as
verified. E.g., allocating an in-memory bitmap as part of the struct
fsverity_info. This should also be optional, in the sense that we shouldn't
use the memory for it when it's not needed.
- Supporting fs-verity in block_read_full_page() in fs/buffer.c.
There may be other changes needed too; those are just the obvious ones.
Is this something that you or Chris is interested in working on?
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-01 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-01 20:13 fsverity PAGE_SIZE constraints Jes Sorensen
2020-06-01 20:36 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2020-06-02 15:49 ` Chris Mason
2020-06-02 21:50 ` Eric Biggers
2020-06-03 13:57 ` Chris Mason
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=20200601203647.GB168749@gmail.com \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=jes@trained-monkey.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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: link
Be 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