From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,FSL_HELO_FAKE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16492C43381 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:42:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC3EE2084D for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="jN8OZhEe"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ke37FgjP" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DC3EE2084D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=ssZvfZ9gC0LXQj0fbYiCKmWS8DM0zn+mAvuzAUQM/JI=; b=jN8OZhEe3EUvDX Zz2HQnWUaKRN44NDRle5UmtmrQuiuKERMwpspWpMTJKJRbiLKdgR7uo4gHQCo3AJRpIR9y2601zmx fupQpbVn3YTopsRcNozpG7wAtguIHfSLm0O1Zq1EO+c7+Ut9Rk+4Gl8tJuLvKyY2CI1cQZp+Miifh mf5h3tojXmQ/KHeYQ5cT+l/NdmDVXrqJZWbdXSyrs0+ReOsuKolP/RqYhzQJaQ3HqABTaygubS51f FebFPjUsETbIjKls5UGP9mMLeg3x+2GUpkmYCTYiZNCsjBvuBCiSn5l6S63NBk3z/zQD/+nCxtIMD W8rv2UNIMb6l/wa4rOBA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gwtIQ-0000KD-21; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:42:10 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gwtIM-0000JR-H2 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:42:07 +0000 Received: from gmail.com (unknown [104.132.1.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 34FC42081B; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:42:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550774525; bh=8WKfNcnNtJXTFf2p8f1PbAp1G/jCPpazwETOsaObbZU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ke37FgjPjfD4DAQE5bmCpnIW8dqvUeojVbB5fbu7JK8OR4Fz0d4bRO/cO9cW/ky01 4dvsH301UvnSe+fJUKitDa2JRfH0Lf4vyaOmAmZHBl3WJVqhpeq3fLp/FZBf5hiPJf OOQnk5yz1Dh5AowMdEuYi2W4cesPUW2PoNiB9Ork= Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 10:42:03 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Richard Weinberger Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 07/18] fscrypt: add FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl Message-ID: <20190221184203.GB140206@gmail.com> References: <20190220065249.32099-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20190221054938.GA12467@sol.localdomain> <2024630.T9XyBPH5Ub@blindfold> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2024630.T9XyBPH5Ub@blindfold> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190221_104206_585389_959B0EA3 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.67 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, "open list:ABI/API" , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel , Satya Tangirala , Paul Crowley Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-mtd" Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:33:12AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Eric, > > Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019, 06:49:39 CET schrieb Eric Biggers: > > Hi Richard, > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:52:38AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 7:55 AM Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > +#define FSCRYPT_FS_KEYRING_DESCRIPTION_SIZE \ > > > > + (CONST_STRLEN("fscrypt-") + FIELD_SIZEOF(struct super_block, s_id)) > > > > + > > > > +#define FSCRYPT_MK_DESCRIPTION_SIZE (2 * FSCRYPT_KEY_DESCRIPTOR_SIZE + 1) > > > > + > > > > +static void format_fs_keyring_description( > > > > + char description[FSCRYPT_FS_KEYRING_DESCRIPTION_SIZE], > > > > + const struct super_block *sb) > > > > +{ > > > > + sprintf(description, "fscrypt-%s", sb->s_id); > > > > +} > > > > > > I fear ->s_id is not the right thing. > > > For filesystems such as ext4 ->s_id is the name of the backing block device, > > > so it is per filesysem instance unique. > > > But this is not guaranteed. For UBIFS ->s_id is just "ubifs", always. > > > So the names will clash. > > > > > > > What name do you suggest using for UBIFS filesystems? The keyring name could be > > set by the filesystem via a fscrypt_operations callback if needed. > > IMHO the BDI name should be used. > > > Note that the keyring name isn't particularly important, since the ioctls will > > work regardless. But we might as well choose something logical, since the > > keyring name will still show up in /proc/keys. > > I'm not done with reviewing your patches, but will it be possible to use keyctl? > For the a unique name is helpful. :) > Not for adding keys, removing keys, or getting a key's status -- those are what the ioctls are for. See e.g. the discussion in patch 7 ("fscrypt: add FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl") for why the keyrings syscalls are a poor fit for fscrypt. - Eric ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/